CIA's top counterterrorism official was fired last week because he opposed detaining Al Qaeda suspects in secret prisons abroad,

The CIA's 'Black Sites': "What are we going to do with the secret prisoners who cannot be tried in our courts? | By Nat Hentoff | 02/26/06 'Village Voice'

The CIA's top counterterrorism official [Robert Grenier] was fired last week because he opposed detaining Al Qaeda suspects in secret prisons abroad, sending them to other countries for interrogation, and using forms of torture such as 'waterboarding,' [making a prisoner believe he is about to be drowned] intelligence sources have claimed. The Sunday Times, London, February 12

For more than three years, I've been reporting on what has been increasingly, but fragmentarily, revealed about secret CIA prisons around the world. On September 17, 2001, the president, in a classified order, gave the CIA these 'special powers' (as Attorney General Alberto Gonzales agreed during his confirmation hearings).

These 'black sites'—as they are called in CIA, White House, and Justice Department files— escaped attempted congressional oversight until December 2005. But in the National Defense Authorization Act, the Senate finally called for regular reports on where those prisons are, what plans there are for the ultimate release of their prisoners, and 'a description of the interrogation procedures used.' Ted Kennedy and John Kerry introduced the resolution. " ...

Media Matters - If It's Sunday, It's Conservative: An analysis of the Sunday talk show guests on ABC, CBS, and NBC, 1997 - 2005

Media Matters - If It's Sunday, It's Conservative: An analysis of the Sunday talk show guests on ABC, CBS, and NBC, 1997 - 2005: "Executive Summary

The Sunday-morning talk shows on ABC, CBS, and NBC are where the prevailing opinions are aired and tested, policymakers state their cases, and the left and right in American politics debate the pressing issues of the day on equal ground. Both sides have their say and face probing questions. Or so you would think.

In fact, as this study reveals, conservative voices significantly outnumber progressive voices on the Sunday talk shows. Media Matters for America conducted a content analysis of ABC's This Week, CBS' Face the Nation, and NBC's Meet the Press, classifying each one of the nearly 7,000 guest appearances during President Bill Clinton's second term, President George W. Bush's first term, and the year 2005 as either Democrat, Republican, conservative, progressive, or neutral. The conclusion is clear: Republicans and conservatives have been offered more opportunities to appear on the Sunday shows - in some cases, dramatically so.

Among the study's key findings:

• The balance between Democrats/progressives and Republicans/conservatives was roughly equal during Clinton's second term, with a slight edge toward Republicans/conservatives: 52 percent of the ideologically identifiable guests were from the right, and 48 percent were from the left. But in Bush's first term, Republicans/ conservatives held a dramatic advantage, outnumbering Democrats/progressives by 58 percent to 42 percent. In 2005, the figures were an identical 58 percent to 42 percent.
• ...
  
• In 1997 and 1998, the shows conducted more solo interviews with Democrats/progressives than with Republicans/conservatives. But in every year since, there have been more solo interviews with Republicans/conservatives.
• ...
• In every year examined by the study -- 1997 - 2005 -- more panels tilted right (a greater number of Republicans/conservatives than Democrats/progressives) than tilted left. In some years, there were two, three, or even four times as many righttitled panels as left-tilted panels.
• Congressional opponents of the Iraq war were largely absent from the Sunday shows, particularly during the period just before the war began.

In short, the Sunday talk shows on ABC, CBS, and NBC are dominated by conservative voices, from newsmakers to commentators. The data from the Clinton years indicate that the disparity cannot be explained simply by the fact that Republicans currently control the government.

[Dubai Ports] DP WORLD EXECUTIVE NOMINATED FOR PRESITIGOUS US GOVT POSITION ... the Bush threatens Veto of any deal -- refuting security concerns

DP World . Press Releases: "DP WORLD EXECUTIVE NOMINATED FOR PRESITIGOUS US GOVT POSITION

Dubai, 24 January 2006: - Global ports operator DP World today welcomed news that one of its senior executives, Dave Sanborn, has been nominated by US President George W. Bush to serve as Maritime Administrator a key transportation appointment reporting directly to Norman Mineta the Secretary of Transportation and Cabinet Member.

The White House has issued a statement from Washington DC announcing the nomination. The confirmation process will begin in February.

Mr Sanborn currently holds the position of Director of Operations for Europe and Latin America for the Dubai-based company

Mohammed Sharaf, CEO, DP World said:
“While we are sorry to lose such an experienced and capable executive, it is exactly those qualities that will make Dave an effective administrator for MarAd. We are proud of Dave’s selection and pleased that the Bush Administration found such a capable executive. We wish him all the best in his new role.”

Ted Bilkey, Chief Operating Officer, DP World said:
“Dave’s decades of experience in markets around the world, together with his passion for the industry and commitment to its development, will allow him to make a positive contribution to the work of the Maritime Administration. We wish him well for the future.”"

Mr Sanborn, a graduate of The United States Merchant Maritime Academy, joined DP World in 2005. He previously held senior roles with shipping lines CMA-CGM (Americas), APL Ltd and Sea-Land and has been based, besides the US, in Brazil, Europe, Hong Kong and Dubai during his career. He has also served in the US Naval Reserve.

Mr Sanborn is due to take up his new role based in Washington DC later in 2006.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT): ‘Nobody With Brains’ Denies That Hussein ‘Was Supporting al-Qaeda’

Think Progress � Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT): ‘Nobody With Brains’ Denies That Hussein ‘Was Supporting al-Qaeda’: "

What Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said about Saddam Hussein’s relationship with al-Qaeda on Saturday:

Nobody denies that [Saddam Hussein] was supporting al-Qaeda…Well, I shouldn’t say nobody. Nobody with brains.

What the bi-partisan 9-11 commission said about Saddam Hussein’s relationship with al-Qaeda:

The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no “collaborative relationship” between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration’s main justifications for the war in Iraq.

Hatch made his remarks at an invitation-only luncheon. They’ve only been reported in a small Utah paper, The St. George Daily Spectrum."

"The Blame Came", VP Accident Tale Filled With Discrepancies - "There's a reason they call this crisis management,"

VP Accident Tale Filled With Discrepancies - Yahoo! News: " By CALVIN WOODWARD and NANCY BENAC, Associated Press | Writers Sat Feb 18, 3:52 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney said he didn't immediately disclose his hunting accident because he wanted the confusing details to come out right. Instead, authorized accounts came out slowly — and often still wrong.

The result: a week of shifting blame, belatedly acknowledged beer consumption (not "zero" drinking after all) and evolving discrepancies in how the shooting happened, its aftermath and the way it was told to the nation.

"There's a reason they call this crisis management," said corporate damage-control specialist Eric Dezenhall, "and that's because it's a mess."
...
BLAME

In the first days after the vice president wounded attorney Harry Whittington while shooting at quail last Saturday in Texas, blame was placed on the victim for not announcing his presence to fellow hunter Cheney.

"The vice president did everything right," Katharine Armstrong, the ranch owner approved by Cheney to disclose the accident, said Monday. ...
...
DRINKING

Although there is no evidence that beer impaired Cheney's judgment, initial denials that he had consumed alcohol were wrong.

"No one was drinking," Armstrong said at the outset. "No, zero, zippo." ...
...
VICTIM'S CONDITION

In the rush to assure everyone Whittington was "just fine," some important details were left out.

Initial reports had him treated at the scene, then taken by ambulance to the hospital, where in no time he was cracking jokes with the nurses. It turned out that after being taken to the emergency room of a local, small hospital, he was flown by helicopter to the intensive care unit of the larger hospital in Corpus Christi. ...
...
LICENSE

Cheney did not have all his hunting papers in order, as suggested by the White House and initially stated by Texas authorities. ...
...
DISCLOSURE

The accident raised questions about the flow of information into and out of the White House communications apparatus.

Asked why no one released news of the shooting on Saturday night, McClellan said "the vice president's office was working to make sure information got out" but that details were slow to reach Washington that evening.

Armstrong, for her part, said no one at the ranch even discussed releasing the news on Saturday. ...
...
TELLING WASHINGTON

McClellan said
President Bush was told shortly before 8 p.m. EST Saturday that Cheney had shot Whittington, less than half an hour after Bush first heard there had a been an accident of some sort involving Cheney's hunting party. Confirmation that Cheney was the shooter was obtained when deputy chief of staff Karl Rove called Armstrong, McClellan said.

However, McClellan said he didn't personally know Cheney was the shooter until the next morning, about 6 a.m. EST Sunday, when he was awakened with the news. ...

"The Blame Came", VP Accident Tale Filled With Discrepancies - "There's a reason they call this crisis management,"

VP Accident Tale Filled With Discrepancies - Yahoo! News: " By CALVIN WOODWARD and NANCY BENAC, Associated Press | Writers Sat Feb 18, 3:52 AM ET

WASHINGTON - Vice President Dick Cheney said he didn't immediately disclose his hunting accident because he wanted the confusing details to come out right. Instead, authorized accounts came out slowly — and often still wrong.

The result: a week of shifting blame, belatedly acknowledged beer consumption (not "zero" drinking after all) and evolving discrepancies in how the shooting happened, its aftermath and the way it was told to the nation.

"There's a reason they call this crisis management," said corporate damage-control specialist Eric Dezenhall, "and that's because it's a mess."
...
BLAME

In the first days after the vice president wounded attorney Harry Whittington while shooting at quail last Saturday in Texas, blame was placed on the victim for not announcing his presence to fellow hunter Cheney.

"The vice president did everything right," Katharine Armstrong, the ranch owner approved by Cheney to disclose the accident, said Monday. ...
...
DRINKING

Although there is no evidence that beer impaired Cheney's judgment, initial denials that he had consumed alcohol were wrong.

"No one was drinking," Armstrong said at the outset. "No, zero, zippo." ...
...
VICTIM'S CONDITION

In the rush to assure everyone Whittington was "just fine," some important details were left out.

Initial reports had him treated at the scene, then taken by ambulance to the hospital, where in no time he was cracking jokes with the nurses. It turned out that after being taken to the emergency room of a local, small hospital, he was flown by helicopter to the intensive care unit of the larger hospital in Corpus Christi. ...
...
LICENSE

Cheney did not have all his hunting papers in order, as suggested by the White House and initially stated by Texas authorities. ...
...
DISCLOSURE

The accident raised questions about the flow of information into and out of the White House communications apparatus.

Asked why no one released news of the shooting on Saturday night, McClellan said "the vice president's office was working to make sure information got out" but that details were slow to reach Washington that evening.

Armstrong, for her part, said no one at the ranch even discussed releasing the news on Saturday. ...
...
TELLING WASHINGTON

McClellan said
President Bush was told shortly before 8 p.m. EST Saturday that Cheney had shot Whittington, less than half an hour after Bush first heard there had a been an accident of some sort involving Cheney's hunting party. Confirmation that Cheney was the shooter was obtained when deputy chief of staff Karl Rove called Armstrong, McClellan said.

However, McClellan said he didn't personally know Cheney was the shooter until the next morning, about 6 a.m. EST Sunday, when he was awakened with the news. ...

Bipartisan Supportt: five self-described whistle-blowers who described retaliation for their disclosures

Bipartisan Support Emerges for Federal Whistle-Blowers - New York Times: "By SCOTT SHANE | Published: February 17, 2006

WASHINGTON, Feb. 16 — Even as the Bush administration presses an aggressive campaign against leaks, some Congressional Republicans are joining Democrats in supporting government employees who say they have been punished for disclosing sensitive information on reported abuses.

Representative Christopher Shays, Republican of Connecticut, is leading the defense of whistle-blowers who have spoken out about abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib, illicit federal wiretapping and other matters. "It's absolutely essential that we have a system that allows people to speak out about abuses, especially in the national security realm," Mr. Shays said in an interview.

He said his conviction that current protections were inadequate was strengthened by testimony on Tuesday at a hearing of his House subcommittee on national security by five self-described whistle-blowers who described retaliation for their disclosures. Mr. Shays's concerns are shared by numerous Democrats and some other Republicans, including Representative Curt Weldon of Pennsylvania, who has denounced what he calls the mistreatment of a military intelligence officer, Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, who disclosed the Pentagon's Able Danger data-mining program. Mr. Weldon says he believes that the program identified Mohammed Atta before he became the lead hijacker in the 2001 terrorist attacks, though a Pentagon review found no evidence to support that conclusion.

Among the military officers who have spoken to him about Able Danger, Mr. Weldon said at a news conference this week, are some "whose lives were ruined, who were threatened and intimidated because they simply wanted to tell the truth." ...

The Case of the Missing Roll-Call Votes - New York Times

The Case of the Missing Roll-Call Votes - New York Times: "By BYRON CALAME | Published: February 12, 2006

This fall's Congressional elections seem certain to rouse the interest of citizen-readers of The New York Times in the votes their legislators are casting in Washington. Given a newspaper's fundamental role in helping readers hold lawmakers accountable, providing lists of roll-call votes on major legislation should be an essential ingredient in The Times's Congressional coverage. And it has been for a long time

But the paper has begun to move away from publishing even some of the most important roll-call votes. Ironically, for a newspaper embarked on a major effort to marry print and digital information to serve its readers, The Times isn't always providing easy access to the votes online, either. A review of a half-dozen recent major votes found that the printed paper didn't publish the roll-call vote or steer readers to any list online. ...

Bush Admin. spent over $1.6 Billion on advertising and P.R. since 2003, GAO finds ... "used taxpayer dollars to fund covert propaganda "

The Raw Story | Bush Admin. spent over $1.6 Billion on advertising and P.R. since 2003, GAO finds: "Published: February 13, 2006

Today Rep. Henry A. Waxman, Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, Rep. George Miller, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, and other senior Democrats released a new Government Accountability Office report finding that the Bush Administration spent more than $1.6 billion in public relations and media contracts in a two and a half year span.

"The government is spending over a billion dollars per year on PR and advertising," said Rep. Waxman. "Careful oversight of this spending is essential given the track record of the Bush Administration, which has used taxpayer dollars to fund covert propaganda within the United States." ...

White House Cover-Up: McClellan Conceals Heart Attack From Press

Think Progress � White House Cover-Up: McClellan Conceals Heart Attack From Press: "White House Cover-Up: McClellan Conceals Heart Attack From Press

For 22 hours, the White House concealed the fact that Vice President Cheney had inadvertantly shot a 78-year old man, Harry Whittington.

The White House continues to withhold critical information from the press. In a press conference today, hospital administrator Peter Banko said that the White House had been informed that Mr. Whittington suffered a heart attack between 9:30-10AM this morning. Watch it:
...
But at today’s White House Press Briefing, which started after 12PM, Scott McClellan didn’t tell the press. CNN confirmed that McClellan “was notified [about the heart attack] just before the briefing.” But McClellan suggested to reporters that he had no new information:

I don’t want to make this about anything other than what it is. It is what it is. I was very respectful and responsive to your questions yesterday. I provided you the information I knew based on the facts that were available… I’m just not going to go back through it again. ...

Katrina: White House caught by surprise ... but actually knew of Levee's Failure the night before

White House Knew of Levee's Failure on Night of Storm - New York Times: "

WASHINGTON, Feb. 9 — In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Bush administration officials said they had been caught by surprise when they were told on Tuesday, Aug. 30, that a levee had broken, allowing floodwaters to engulf New Orleans.

But Congressional investigators have now learned that an eyewitness account of the flooding from a federal emergency official reached the Homeland Security Department's headquarters starting at 9:27 p.m. the day before, and the White House itself at midnight. ...

Tom Ridge acknowledged that the post 9/11 terror alerts were often based on "flimsy evidence"

Tom Ridge's Mea Culpa:: "The Code Orange Terror Alerts were based on Fake Intelligence | by Michel Chossudovsky | www.globalresearch.ca 12 May 2005 | The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/505A.html

"If we simply go to red ... it basically shuts down the country,"(Tom Ridge) [meaning that civilian government bodies would be closed down and taken over by an Emergency Administration.]
"What a lot of Americans suspected all along turns out to be true. The color-coded alert system for terrorist attacks was a fraud." (www.North.Jersey.com )

Mea Culpa

After leaving his position at Homeland Security, Tom Ridge acknowledged that the post 9/11 terror alerts were often based on "flimsy evidence" and that he had been pressured by the CIA to raise the threat level:

The Bush administration periodically put the USA on high alert for terrorist attacks even though then-Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge argued there was only flimsy evidence to justify raising the threat level… Ridge [said] .he often disagreed with administration officials who wanted to elevate the threat level to orange, or "high" risk of terrorist attack, but was overruled.

"More often than not we were the least inclined to raise it…Sometimes we disagreed with the intelligence assessment. Sometimes we thought even if the intelligence was good, you don't necessarily put the country on (alert). ... There were times when some people were really aggressive about raising it, and we said, 'For that?' " (USA Today , 10 May 2005)

A review of the three high profile code orange terror alerts confirms in all three cases that the intelligence had been fabricated.

1. February 7, 2003, Two days after Colin Powell's Feb 5 presentation to the UN Security Council, in the month prior to the invasion of Iraq,
2. December 21, Christmas 2003
3. July 29th 2004, on the same day as John Kerry's acceptance speech at the Democratic Convention. The code orange alert served to galvanize US public opinion in favor of Bush's "war on terrorism" in the months leading up to the November 2004 elections.

In all three cases, Tom Ridge's warnings on the nature of the threat were categorical.The official announcements by the Homeland Security Department had dispelled any lingering doubts regarding the threat level:

"the risk [during the Christmas period] is perhaps greater now than at any point since September 11, 2001;"
"indications that [the] near-term attacks ... will either rival or exceed the [9/11] attacks".
"And it's pretty clear that the nation's capital and New York city would be on any list..."

Compare these pronouncements to Ridge's May 10 statement where he admits that the evidence was flimsy. ...

Censorship Is Alleged at NOAA: "It seems more like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union than the United States,"

Censorship Is Alleged at NOAA: By Juliet Eilperin | Washington Post Staff Writer | Saturday, February 11, 2006; Page A07 | Scientists Afraid to Speak Out, NASA Climate Expert Reports

NEW YORK, Feb. 10 -- James E. Hansen, the NASA climate scientist who sparked an uproar last month by accusing the Bush administration of keeping scientific information from reaching the public, said Friday that officials at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration are also muzzling researchers who study global warming.

Hansen, speaking in a panel discussion about science and the environment before a packed audience at the New School university, said that while he hopes his own agency will soon adopt a more open policy, NOAA insists on having 'a minder' monitor its scientists when they discuss their findings with journalists."

"It seems more like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union than the United States," said Hansen, prompting a round of applause from the audience. He added that while NOAA officials said they maintain the policy for their scientists' protection, "if you buy that one please see me at the break, because there's a bridge down the street I'd like to sell you." ...

W.House knew of levee failure night of storm ... night before the Bush administration has said it learned of the disaster

Excite News: "W.House knew of levee failure night of storm: Times | Feb 10, 7:27 AM (ET)

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Congressional investigators have learned a federal official's eyewitness account of the New Orleans flooding reached the Homeland Security Department the night before the Bush administration has said it learned of the disaster, the New York Times said on Thursday.

The newspaper said a Federal Emergency Management Agency spokesman sent an e-mail at 9:27 p.m. on Monday, August 29, the day the levee broke in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, to the chief of staff of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff. The e-mail said conditions "are far more serious than media reports are currently reflecting.

"Finding extensive flooding and more stranded people than they had thought -- also a number of fires," the e-mail said, according to The Times.

White House officials have confirmed to congressional investigators that the report of the levee break arrived there at midnight, the paper said, adding Trent Duffy, a White House spokesman, "acknowledged as much in an interview this week, though he said it was surrounded with conflicting reports."

Furthermore, Michael Brown, director of FEMA until he resigned under pressure on September 12, told the Times on Thursday that, learning of this eyewitness report, he notified the White House of the news that night. ...

new standard of cynicism when NASA's leading authority on global warming to be mugged by a 24-year-old presidential appointee who inflated his resume

Censoring Truth - New York Times: "Editorial | Published: February 9, 2006

The Bush administration long ago secured a special place in history for the audacity with which it manipulates science to suit its political ends. But it set a new standard of cynicism when it allowed NASA's leading authority on global warming to be mugged by a 24-year-old presidential appointee who, quite apart from having no training on that issue, had inflated his resume.

In early December, James Hansen, the space agency's top climate specialist, called for accelerated efforts to reduce industrial emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases linked to global warming. After his speech, he told Andrew C. Revkin of The Times, he was threatened with "dire consequences" if he continued to call for aggressive action.

This was not the first time Dr. Hansen had been rebuked by the Bush team, which has spent the better part of five years avoiding the issue of global warming. It was merely one piece of a larger pattern of deception and denial.

The administration has sought to influence the policy debate by muzzling the people who disagree with it or — as was the case with two major reports from the Environmental Protection Agency in 2002 and 2003 — editing out inconvenient truths or censoring them entirely ...

Mr. Deutsch's attempts to manipulate science and scientists, although unusually blatant, were not unique.

The Politics of Science: Thursday, February 9, 2006; Page A22
...
Mr. Deutsch prevented reporters from interviewing James E. Hansen, the leading climate scientist at NASA, telling colleagues he was doing so because his job was to "make the president look good." Mr. Deutsch also instructed another NASA scientist to add the word "theory" after every written mention of the Big Bang, on the grounds that the accepted scientific explanation of the origins of the universe "is an opinion" and that NASA should not discount the possibility of "intelligent design by a creator."

The spectacle of a young political appointee with no college degree exerting crude political control over senior government scientists and civil servants with many decades of experience is deeply disturbing. More disturbing is the fact that Mr. Deutsch's attempts to manipulate science and scientists, although unusually blatant, were not unique. Just before Christmas, the federal Environmental Protection Agency issued "talking points" to local environmental agencies. These suggestions were intended to help their spokesmen play down an Associated Press story that -- using the EPA's own data -- showed that impoverished neighborhoods had higher levels of air pollution. ...

Independent Online Edition > Americas

Independent Online Edition > Americas: "Bush squirms as policies denounced at King funeral | By Andrew Gumbel | Published: 08 February 2006

President George Bush led a crowd of 10,000 mourners at yesterday's funeral for Coretta Scott King, one of the icons of the civil rights movement, only to squirm in his seat as one speaker after another invoked Mrs King's spirit to lambast his administration on everything from the Iraq war to the response to last year's Hurricane Katrina. ...

growing numbers of researchers, say their findings are being discounted, distorted or quashed by Bush Administration appointees.

TIME.com: The Political Science Test -- Feb. 13, 2006 -- Page 1: "By MARK THOMPSON, KAREN TUMULTY | Posted Sunday, Feb. 05, 2006

Bush said science would guide his decisions, but those in the lab see ideology intruding on their work

The 3 1/2-hr. conference call brought together nearly two dozen of the nation's best minds on the subject of air quality--and many of them were steamed. As the scientists of the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, they are rarely overruled on their recommendations about how the government should react to the latest and best research on the dangers of dirty air. Seven months ago, they warned the EPA in a letter that unless it made at least modest reductions in the amount of airborne soot, thousands of Americans would die prematurely each year. But last December, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson, citing 'the best available science,' ignored their counsel. On the phone call last week, an exasperated Dr. James Crapo, professor of medicine at Denver's National Jewish Medical and Research Center, told his fellow scientists, 'We need to write another letter and this time take a stronger stand.'

Starting when he was a presidential candidate in 2000, George W. Bush has often assured voters that his policymaking would be guided by 'sound science.' Last week, in his State of the Union address, the President pointed to scientific research as the way to 'lead the world in opportunity and innovation for decades to come.' Yet growing numbers of researchers, both in and out of government, say their findings--on pollution, climate change, reproductive health, stem-cell research and other areas in which science often finds itself at odds with religious, ideological or corporate interests--are being discounted, distorted or quashed by Bush Administration appointees." ...

Reputable British papers such as Guardian, Independent, and Financial Times have already reported on the most recent memo, no American newspaper has

Think Progress � The Story of How Bush Went Into Iraq, As Told by the British: "

The Independent confirms a report by the Guardian on a newly-revealed British memo. The memo claims that Bush made the decision to attack Iraq two months prior to the war. Furthermore, the memo states that Bush was thinking about baiting Iraq into a breach of UN resolutions by “flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colors.”

This most-recent memo is just the latest in a series of official British government documents that have revealed shocking information about how Bush misled the nation into Iraq (see the original Downing Street Memo and the British Briefing Papers revealed previously by ThinkProgress).

There are two things all these memos share in common: 1) none of the memos’ validity has been disputed, and 2) the U.S. media has been slow to cover every single one of them. In fact, while reputable British papers such as the Guardian, the Independent, and the Financial Times have already reported on the most recent memo, no American newspaper has.

If the American media decided to aggressively report on the evidence contained in these British memos, here’s the story they would find:

“Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” [Link]

“US is scrambling to establish a link between Iraq and Al [Qaida that] is so far frankly unconvincing.” [Link]

“Even the best survey of Iraq’s WMD programmes will not show much advance in recent years on [the] nuclear, missile or CW/BW fronts.” [Link]

“Indeed if the argument [for attacking Iraq] is to be won, the whole case against Iraq and in favour (if necessary) of military action, needs to be narrated with reference to the international rule of law.” [Link]

“A legal justification for invasion would be needed. Subject to law Officers advice, none currently exists.” [Link]

“The NSC (National Security Council) had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record.” [Link]

“The two leaders [Bush and Blair] were worried by the lack of hard evidence that Saddam Hussein had broken UN resolutions, though privately they were convinced that he had. According to the memorandum, Mr Bush said: ‘The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach.’” [Link]

“On January 31 2003 - nearly two months before the invasion - … Mr Bush made it clear the US intended to invade whether or not there was a second UN resolution and even if UN inspectors found no evidence of a banned Iraqi weapons programme.” [Link]

“[Bush] added that he had a date, 10 March, pencilled in for the start of military action. The war actually began on 20 March.” [Link]

“What happens on the morning after?” [Link]

“There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.” [Link]

“Bush said that he ‘thought it unlikely that there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups.’” [Link]

“We have to answer the big question – what will this action achieve? There seems to be a larger hole in this than anything.” [Link]

Judge Sets Trial for Libby in CIA Leak ...[ ... moves it from before to aftert he election! ]

Judge Sets Trial for Libby in CIA Leak: "By TONI LOCY | The Associated Press | Saturday, February 4, 2006; 12:04 AM

WASHINGTON -- The perjury trial of Vice President Dick Cheney's former chief of staff won't begin until January 2007, after the midterm congressional elections, in timing that Democrats consider favorable to Republicans.
...

Walton, appointed to the court by President Bush, said he had wanted to start the trial in September but agreed to push the date back when one of Libby's lawyers had a scheduling conflict.

Democrats had hoped Libby's trial would be held before the November elections to help bolster their attacks on Republican congressional candidates over the CIA leak investigation, the bribery scandal involving former lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Bush's domestic spying program.

"The Republicans dodged a bullet," said Democratic strategist Dane Strother. "It's a whole menu of corruption ... and it's a shame we have to wait to have Scooter Libby for dessert." ...

[State of the Union ... or Proganda with no intention to execute?] .. "no actual policy white papers"

Sound off:: "State of Delusion | by Paul Krugman | The New York Times | February 3, 2006

So President Bush's plan to reduce imports of Middle East oil turns out to be no more substantial than his plan -- floated two years ago, then flushed down the memory hole -- to send humans to Mars.

But what did you expect? After five years in power, the Bush administration is still -- perhaps more than ever -- run by Mayberry Machiavellis, who don't take the business of governing seriously.

Here's the story on oil: In the State of the Union address, Mr. Bush suggested that "cutting-edge methods of producing ethanol" and other technologies would allow us "to replace more than 75 percent of our oil imports from the Middle East."

But the next day, officials explained that he didn't really mean what he said. "This was purely an example," said Samuel Bodman, the energy secretary. And the administration has actually been scaling back the very research that Mr. Bush hyped on Tuesday night: the National Renewable Energy Laboratory is about to lay off staff because of cuts to its budget.

"A veteran researcher," reports The New York Times, "said the staff had been told that the cuts would be concentrated among researchers in wind and biomass, which includes ethanol."

Why announce impressive sounding goals when you have no plan to achieve them? The best guess is that the energy "plan" was hastily thrown together to give Mr. Bush something positive to say.

For weeks administration sources told reporters that the State of the Union address would focus on health care. But at the last minute the White House might have realized that its health care proposals, based on the idea that Americans have too much insurance, would suffer the same political fate as its attempt to privatize Social Security. ("Congress," Mr. Bush said, "did not act last year on my proposal to save Social Security." Democrats responded with a standing ovation.)
...
In fact, reconstruction has failed. Almost three years after the war began, oil production is well below prewar levels, Baghdad is getting only an average of 3.2 hours of electricity a day, and more than 60 percent of water and sanitation projects have been canceled.
...
There is a common theme underlying the botched reconstruction of Iraq, the botched response to Katrina (which Mr. Bush never mentioned), the botched drug program and the nonexistent energy program. ... "There were no actual policy white papers on domestic issues." ...

Shades of 1984? rewriting history? removing references[2] to Tom DeLay

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/United States Congress - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: "Description

This RFC is being opened in order to further a centralized discussion concerning actions to be taken against US Congressional staffers and possibly other federal employees who have engaged in unethical and possibly libelous behavior in violation of Wikipedia policies (WP:NPOV, WP:CIV). The editors from these IP ranges have been rude, abrasive, immature, and show disregard for Wikipedia policy. The editors have frequently tried to censor the history of elected officials, often replacing community articles with censored biographies despite other users' attempts to dispute these violations. They also violate Wikipedia:Verifiability, by deleting verified reports, while adding flattering things about members of Congress that are unverified.

The offending editors have been blocked. This RFC is needed to gather community comments. It is proposed that a one week block is not enough. The block was lifted January 30, 2006. A new block for additional vandalism was enforced for three hours February 1, 2006 at 14:59.
[edit]

Evidence of disputed behavior

A full list of details can be found at Wikipedia:Congressional Staffer Edits. A lot of details are self-evident. Additional background can be found in this newspaper article:

* Lehmann, Evan. (January 27, 2006) 'Rewriting history under the dome: Online 'encyclopedia' allows anyone to edit entries, and congressional staffers do just that to bosses' bios'. Lowell (Mass.) Sun. - accessed January 20, 2006

The following policy violations are documented:
[edit]

Continuing Violations

In the article for Congressman Thad McCotter (R-MI) removing references[2] to Tom DeLay:

'In 2005, he has come under srutiny for accepting campaign contributions from embattled former house leader Tom Delay'

This violation occurred 19:39, 31 January 2006.

IP was blocked for 3 hours, see the noticeboard. ~Cheers —Achille 2006-02-01 16:53Z

In the article for Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO) removing references[3] to Tom DeLay:

'Musgrave received $30,000 in campaign contributions from former majority leader Tom DeLay's ARMPAC.'

This violation occurred 14:16, 1 February 2006.

In the article for Congressman Dan Lungren (R-CA) removing references[4] to percentage of vote received in defeat for for Governor of California:

'Lungren received 38% of the vote.'

This violation occurred 01:05, 2 February 2006."

The President should not be able to override our governance and make us part of his Gestapo regime ...

STARK INTRODUCES RESOLUTION INVESTIGATING THE REMOVAL OF TWO VISITORS FROM THE HOUSE GALLERY DURING PRESIDENT BUSH’S STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS: "February 1, 2006 | Contact: Debbie Curtis (202)225-5065

Washington, DC: Today, Representative Pete Stark (CA-13) introduced a resolution calling for an investigation into the removal of Cindy Sheehan and Beverly Young from the House Gallery during President Bush’s State of the Union address last night.

These two individuals were removed from the House Gallery by the Capitol Police for allegedly “protesting.” That determination was based on the fact that each wore a T-shirt with words on the front. Cindy Sheehan’s shirt read: “2445 Dead. How many more?” Beverly Young’s shirt read: “Support the Troops – Defending our Freedom.”

“There are no rules of the House Gallery that prohibit the wearing of T-shirts with writing on them. Yet, these two individuals were forced from the House Gallery by the Capitol Police. Under what authority were the police acting? An investigation is warranted,” stated Rep. Stark.

“President Bush regularly requires his audiences to be screened and sanitized before he will appear before them. But, this is supposed to be the people’s House. The President should not be able to override our governance and make us part of his Gestapo regime,” concluded Rep. Stark. ...

Police Remove Sheehan From Bush Speech ... worn a T-shirt with an anti-war slogan to Tuesday night's speech

Excite News: "Police Remove Sheehan From Bush Speech | Feb 1, 7:44 AM (ET) | By LAURIE KELLMAN

WASHINGTON (AP) - Cindy Sheehan finally got her invitation to see President Bush again, but before she set eyes on him at the State of the Union address, Capitol Police removed her from the gallery overlooking the House chamber.

The offense: her shirt, bearing an anti-war message and other 'unlawful conduct,' police said.

Sheehan, the mother of a fallen soldier in Iraq who reinvigorated the anti-war movement, was handcuffed and charged with unlawful conduct, according to Capitol Police Sgt. Kimberly Schneider. The charge was a misdemeanor and Sheehan was being released on her own recognizance, Schneider said.

Schneider said Sheehan had worn a T-shirt with an anti-war slogan to Tuesday night's speech and covered it up until she took her seat. Police warned her that such displays were not allowed in the House chamber, but she did not respond, the spokeswoman said.

Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., gave Sheehan her only ticket earlier in the day - Gallery 5, seat 7, row A - while Sheehan was attending an 'alternative state of the union' news conference by CODEPINK, a group pushing for an end to the Iraq war.

'I'm proud that Cindy's my guest tonight,' Woolsey said in an interview before the speech. 'She has made a difference in the debate to bring our troops home from Iraq.' ...