Six Dimensions of Scandal

[H2O Man]

The recent reports on Jane Harman’s role in the attempt to cover up the neoconservative/AIPAC espionage scandal has come as no surprise to those who have participated in discussions on this topic on the Democratic Underground. In fact, the "old timers" on this forum are in a unique position, not only on this forum, but in the context of the larger society, because some of the best minds on the progressive left have coordinated efforts to uncover the many connections between this scandal, and several others that took place in the Bush-Cheney years.

It is important to remember that no presidential scandal ever happens in a vacuum. Every scandal is actually part of a larger, multi-dimension series of inter-related illegal activities. This was true in Watergate, and in the Iran-Contra scandals.

The neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal is closely related to – and indeed, overlapping with – the Plame scandal; the Niger forgeries scandal; the torture scandal; the domestic spying scandal; and the scandalous lies that brought this nation to war in Iraq. By no coincidence, all six of these dimensions of illegal activities took place within a specific context: they are all the results of VP Dick Cheney’s having "suspended" Constitutional rule on 9/11, and installing the "shadow government" which was documented in Senator Robert Byrd’s book, "Losing America."

The "shadow government" replaced the three branches of the federal government, as defined in the Constitution, with a "single branch," comprised of select members of the executive branch and business community. Only one member of this "shadow government" could lay claim to having been elected in 2000, and that was Dick Cheney. They appointed George W. Bush to front for them in public, much as Ronald Reagan had fronted for other entities, both when he played the roles as General Electric’s spokesman, and President of the United States.

The Cheneyites had identified both short- and long-term goals, well before 9/11. One short-term goal was to overthrow Saddam Hussein in Iraq; a long-term goal was to remake the geo-political map of the Middle East. There is significant documentation that indicates their plan to overthrow Saddam was considered to be the first step towards reaching the larger goals.

The Cheneyite planning required a degree of control over the intelligence community that the general public remains largely ignorant of. There has been a purposeful amount of misinformation spread by the corporate media, that suggests the administration officials were sincere in their that Saddam was connected to 9/11, and that he possessed WMD. Hence, when Scooter Libby was tried for five felonies, the media portrayed his activities as the result of the intelligence community providing incorrect analysis, which the administration then acted upon. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In fact, Cheney & Company had set up cells of neoconservative fellow travelers within several powerful agencies, including the Defense and State Departments. These are documented in Ambassador Joseph Wilson’s book, "The Politics of Truth." Those cells were focused upon marginalizing accurate intelligence analysis, crushing dissent, and coordinating efforts with other private domestic intelligence sources, as well as with foreign interests – and all of this without any Congressional oversight.

The neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal provides us with an example of how this group of people operate. In his 2-27-06 Court Order, US District Court Judge T.S. Ellis noted that AIPAC’s organizational structure had allowed a group to create "a quasi intelligence service infiltrating the Executive Branch and Congress," while serving as "an agent of foreign influence."

In James Bamford’s "A Pretext for War: 9/11, Iraq, and the Abuse of America’s Intelligence Agencies," the author details decades of efforts by honest intelligence employees to uncover the small group of individuals who have been involved in espionage, targeting "Top Secret" information to pass to a foreign nation. In the new "afterword" of the 2005 edition, Bamford connects this with the neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal. He provides valuable information on how investigators tracked and caught the three primary suspects, as well as efforts by some in Congress to engage in a political cover-up of a serious crime.

There are three levels of classified military information: Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret. The information that is in question in this case is classified as Top Secret, the highest level, meaning that "the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security."

Two of the three individuals charged with violating the law in this case had signed Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreements, while working with the US government. They were fully aware of the criminal nature of their activities, which is evident by the length they went to conceal their activities. The third individual was also fully aware, as evidenced by statements he made in intercepted conversations with other individuals involved in the criminal activities.

Basically, a member of Doug Feith’s Office of Special Plans was passing intelligence concerning Iran to two members of AIPAC, who in turn passed it on to foreign intelligence agents. This was part of the Cheney plan to establish a base of operations within Iraq, and to then overthrow the current government in Iran, and establish a new regime that was acceptable to the Cheneyites.

The person from Feith’s office has already entered a guilty plea. The two "former" AIPAC officials are still engaged in pre-trial activities. Their defense is based entirely upon "gray mail": threatening to expose both Top Secret intelligence, and a number of officials – including Condi Rice and Dick Armitage – who were involved at some level in the administration’s illegal activities relating to the case.

The information regarding Jane Harman comes as no surprise to DUers familiar with her political career. In Barton Gellman’s book "Angler: The Cheney Vice Presidency," the author documents how Harman was eager to win favor with VP Cheney, by attempting to help him conceal the criminal nature of some of his activities, and to provide legal justification for other activities.

If the current Department of Justice is inclined to enforce the laws of the land in the Six Dimensions of the Bush-Cheney scandals, those at risk of facing legal consequences will likewise up the ante with gray mail. This includes attempting to shift the focus, and expose those democrats who either participated at some level, or stood silently by, on the sidelines.

Those familiar with the neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal, for instance, know that there are ties to other democrats in Washington, DC. If the case goes to trial, there will be a coordinated attack on those democrats, which will take place outside of the courtroom. Reputations will suffer. In my opinion, so be it. Our Constitutional democracy is at risk. The election of President Obama and VP Biden, along with a democratic majority in the legislative branch, does not alone eliminate that threat. It’s a step in the right direction. But true justice demands that the cards are laid out upon the table, and people accept the consequences for their actions.

Is that too much to ask?

H2O Man

[OneGrassRoot]

1. Huge K&R. Priceless....

thank you for this brilliant summary. :)

[H2O Man]

3. Thank you.

I think the OP is a fair summary of what happened to our country between 2001 and today. I do not think that many people in Washington, DC, would be willing to confront these issues, without the citizens at the grass roots level demanding justice. There are some good democrats who would/will take positive actions, if we make the demands that empower them to do so.

It's curious that there is so much opposition to the rule of law.

[OneGrassRoot]

4. It's all so fragmented, although linked.....

pushing for one investigation, and even getting it, rarely gets to the heart of the corruption.

I wonder what one single focus could truly bring the house of cards tumbling down?

Or WHO could, and would, bring it tumbling down for the world to see once and for all? (Though some will remain intentionally ignorant and in denial, no doubt.)

[Beam Me Up]

10. To me, that "one single focus" is obvious: 9/11 itself.

First they had to get the prime players out of the private sector and into core positions at the Federal level. That's why the defeat of Gore was so important. We can lay that at the feet of the Supreme Court.

Once in they began immediately to put into place everything they needed to pursue their domestic and middle east agendas -- everything from warrantless wiretapping to preparations for the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

What they needed was a "trigger" that would justify the necessary increased military spending. They'd made their intentions very clear in their white paper "Rebuilding America's Defenses" published in September 2000. They also made clear the need for a "catalyzing event like a new Perl Harbor" to bring about the "revolutionary change" outlined in this paper.

I understand that for some, 9/11 is a TABOO topic. That is most unfortunate because it is a KEY TOPIC for everything that followed it. Right now THE continuing justification for the war crimes committed by the Bush administration rest on a very carefully crafted and media perpetuated narrative of what 9/11 was, how it happened and who was responsible. Publicly pierce that narrative and the supports for this criminal regime will come tumbling down.

It is interesting to note, IMO, that the key person responsible for cementing the finishing touches on that narrative was http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_D._Zelikow">Philip Zelikow. As executive director of the 9/11 commission he and his staff were able to steer the Commission toward certain pieces of information and away from others. I think it is especially interesting given his http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKzLChQ1p7k">recent interview with Maddow where he appears to be distancing himself from the Bush administration (and protecting the State Dept.?) in relation to the torture memos. Very interesting indeed.

[OneGrassRoot]

14. I'm with you, 100%.

I think some of the things the PNAC has been planning and working towards for decades could indeed pull the rug out from under SO much and expose the truth.

But again, I'm wondering who will do that....and WHAT issue the grassroots should focus on to be the catalyst for EVERYTHING to be exposed.

[H2O Man]

15. Discussions of 9/11

result in threads on DU being shackled with a ball & chain, and sentenced to a dungeon. Hence, I hope that people will not intentionally or unintentionally direct this thread in that direction.

Thanks.

[Beam Me Up]

20. Yes.

I know. This will not go there. I have every respect for what you are doing.

[robertpaulsen]

23. One Single Focus.

Beam Me Up, I totally understand where you're coming from, just as I completely understand where H2O Man is coming from. If there's a common ground where we can all agree to place One Single Focus, I would hope it would be on the Deep State itself. If we understand that that is what we are truly fighting against, then the truth will fall into place with a truly open & truly independent investigation. Sibel Edmonds said it best:

"Essentially, there is only one investigation – a very big one, an all-inclusive one. Completely by chance, I, a lowly translator, stumbled over one piece of it. But I can tell you there are a lot of people involved, a lot of ranking officials, and a lot of illegal activities that include multi-billion-dollar drug-smuggling operations, black-market nuclear sales to terrorists and unsavory regimes, you name it. And of course a lot of people from abroad are involved. It's massive. So to do this investigation, to really do it, they will have to look into everything… That's the beauty of it. You can start from the AIPAC angle. You can start from the Plame case. You can start from my case. They all end up going to the same place, and they revolve around the same nucleus of people. There may be a lot of them, but it is one group. And they are very dangerous for all of us."

http://americanjudas.blogspot.com/2007/03/american-judas-2nd-edition-investigate.html

[DemReadingDU]

25. This group of people, cabal, or whatever they're called

Would they be somehow linked into the financial scandal - the looting of our taxmoney being funneled thru AIG to the banksters?

All these zillions of dollars laundered everywhere for a few wealthy people, there seems like they would be a tied together somehow? Or maybe my brain is overthinking.

[robertpaulsen]

30. Certainly. The origins of AIG are linked to OSS, the forerunner of CIA.

Thanks to seemslikeadream for finding this:

American International Group

Hank Greenberg runs the world's second largest financial conglomerate and the largest underwriter of commercial and industrial insurance. Last year, AIG reported net income of $10 billion. It has $648 billion in assets, a market value of $195 billion, $77 billion in sales and $6.5 billion in annual profits. It has operations in 130 countries and nearly 77,000 employees. It ranks third on Forbes' list of the world’s biggest companies, after Citigroup, and General Electric.

AIG is a public company. Its largest single shareholder with 13.62 percent of AIG stock is Starr International Company (SICO), a private company headquartered in the tax haven of Bermuda. Greenberg owns 21.86 percent of SICO. Forbes says Greenberg has a net-worth of $3.6 billion, making him the world’s 132nd richest man. Greenberg was elected AIG president in 1962, CEO in 1967 and chairman in 1989.

Though it is an American company listed on the New York Stock Exchange, AIG makes extensive use of offshore jurisdictions such as Barbados, Bermuda and Luxembourg that are immune from U.S. regulatory and tax scrutiny. They help the company launder profits to evade U.S. taxes and hide insider connections in supposedly "arms-length" deals. This is especially important as the company has moved into financial services and asset management, handling the wealth of “high net-worth” clients -- the mega-rich.

Greenberg has enviable political clout, never so much in evidence as when, with the help of Henry Kissinger -- chair of AIG's international advisory committee and a paid consultant via Kissinger Associates – AIG became in 1995, the first company licensed to sell insurance in China. AIG was the only foreign firm that owned 100 percent of its license there.

The American International Group at its origins was linked to the OSS (Office of Strategic Services) the forerunner of the CIA. It grew from the Asia Life/C. V. Starr companies founded by Cornelius Starr who started his insurance empire in Shanghai in 1919, the first westerner to market insurance in China.

Starr served with the OSS during World War II, and the Starr Corporation, located in the same building as the OSS in New York, provided intelligence on shipping, manufacturing and industrial bombing targets in Asia and Germany. The companies' biggest shareholder was Starr International Company (SICO), a private holding company incorporated in offshore Panama and with principal executive offices in offshore Bermuda, to avoid U.S. regulation and taxes. Starr left Greenberg a large block of Starr International stock.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=11657aig

I'll try to PM seemslikeadream to join this thread. I'm sure there's a lot more links where that came from!

[Beam Me Up]

32. Ask the question: "What gives money value".

What backs up a currency? The US hasn't been on a gold standard for a long time -- and I'm not gold standard advocate. The question goes deeper: By what means is a currency given legitimacy in the global market? What is backing up the US Dollar if NOT its ability to control certain markets, particularly oil, drugs and armaments? And by what overt and covert means are those markets controlled? WHY was it a matter of national security to invade both Afghanistan and Iraq (the so called "war on terror" being one of those oxymoron policies which has an aim that is quite different from that publicly stated).

Anyway, your question is a good one and I think the answer is "yes" although it may not be either obvious or easy to outline.

[Beam Me Up]

27. I agree.

My response was to OneGrassRoot's question in post (#3 above): "Or WHO could, and would, bring it tumbling down for the world to see once and for all?" My answer is there is only one "who" and that is the American public. Of course you are right, there are many crimes to investigate, many different rabbit holes one can go down. But is there an issue that is both sufficiently central to all the rest AND sufficiently compelling to motivate the public to demand investigation, action and accountability? Thus my reply. We can see, by contrast, that even the profound (although very tightly controlled) revelations of someone like Sibel Edmonds, http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/25/60minutes/main526954.shtml">who told some of her story to CBS's Ed Bradley as early as September, 2002, is not, in itself, sufficiently compelling. Even the torture issue which is now being brought forward only goes "just so far".


e: typo, html

[DemReadingDU]

35. only one "who" and that is the American public

Exactly.

Some are waking up, having lost their job. More will wake up when they have also lost their job, health insurance, pension/IRA/401(K), shelter, and are hungry. When most people are direly affected and nothing further to lose, they will then go to Washington with pitchforks in hand, demanding the ouster of the politicians. That's when there will be reform and we will get to the bottom of all these scandals. Not sure if that will happen in my lifetime, but surely my children and grandbabies.


P.S. Has your ID always been 'Beam Me Up'? I'm sorry I can't remember if you changed your ID.

[robertpaulsen]

36. Good point.

It is the American public. It is not the government or any "Truth Commission" created by, staffed by and conducted for the American government. That is the path to another Warren, or Kean or any other sugar-coated, pat-on-the-back, rooster-clearing-itself-of-henhouse-complicity investigation. What is needed is something more akin to the Russell Tribunal that investigated and evaluated American foreign policy and military intervention in Vietnam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Tribunal

I wonder how Eric Holder would react to this sort of judgement being presented to him. What do you think?

[OneGrassRoot]

44. Interesting. I appreciate this interaction....

And, once again, in order for the public to be educated and made aware, investigative journalists must do their jobs and get air time/print space for the fire to really start burning.

My Pollyanna hope today is that a few people who have indeed simply been "talking heads" will see the tremendous opportunity of being where they are in this point in time -- it's historic, and they could really make a name for themselves.

Seymour Hersh and Helen Thomas, along with the brilliant blogosphere, could really light that fire if SOMETHING would breakthrough in MSM.

[robertpaulsen]

50. It would be truly wonderful for this to coalesce into a more powerful unified voice.

Something truly borne out of the interests of the people, not like the phoney Teabaggers funded by racists and neo-con money interests. I wasn't alive during the Vietnam era, but I have recently read about the International War Crimes Tribunal that Jean-Paul Sartre and Bertrand Russell organized to investigate the reality behind the Vietnam War. I would be interested in the opinions of DUers who remember that time if they feel that something similar to this might be an appropriate venue to start an investigation that those in a position to prosecute like Attorney General Eric Holder might pay attention and act accordingly.

[OneGrassRoot]

51. I was too young myself to remember anything....

and, I'm sorry to say, I'm not the best student of history.

General Karpinski on KO last night brought up the subject of an international tribunal investigation.

That feels like the way to go -- how does that even start? Who initiates that? I suppose I need to do the same reading you've been doing.

Where is Spain in all of this now -- are they still sitting on the fence waiting to see what we shall do?

I don't mean to pummel you with questions...I'm talking (typing) out loud.

;)

[H2O Man]

53. The best of the

old "Plame Threads" took place when a large group of DUers engaged in a conversation that included plenty of "talking/typing out loud." One person's thought/suspicion would lead to a dozen people responding, then two dozen people doing research. RP was one of the team leaders.

[robertpaulsen]

75. Thanks H2O Man. And thanks for being a great leader yourself starting this thread!

What you describe:

One person's thought/suspicion would lead to a dozen people responding, then two dozen people doing research.

That's what a truly great DU thread is all about. We can start our own Deep State Tribunal.

Here's a typing out loud thought: what is the driving force behind Dick Cheney's recent vocal diarrhea? Is it desperation, or does he feel emboldened that the moles he left behind in the government are secure since Hersh's revelations have resulted in no investigation?

[robertpaulsen]

54. Here's something: World Tribunal on Iraq

World Tribunal on Iraq


The World Tribunal on Iraq (WTI) is a people's court consisting of intellectuals, human rights campaigners and non-governmental organizations. It sprung from the anti-war movement and is modelled on the Russell Tribunal of the American movement against the Vietnam War. It counts among its supporters Indian author Arundhati Roy and United Nations Assistant General Secretary Denis Halliday, though consciously avoids a hierarchical structure. The WTI routinely finds that the coalition forces in Iraq are guilty of war crimes and violations of the Geneva Conventions. The Tribunal tends to receive less coverage in the United States and United Kingdom than in the Middle East and Europe, and is frequently described by supporters of the war as a "kangaroo court". Its members are not popularly elected.

A series of hearings is taking place under the title of the "World Tribunal on Iraq" with the purposes of:

* Hearing evidence in respect of any claim that the launch of the war in Iraq was a criminal act.
* Hearing evidence in respect of any alleged international criminal conduct during and as a part of the war in Iraq.
* Investigation of the doctrines espoused in the war (by all sides) and the economic connections which some allege are connected with the decision to wage the war in Iraq.
* To reach a decision based on evidence and expert testimony in respect of these issues and the war in Iraq.

snip

Actions

* London, November 2003 - Inquiry into the alleged commission of war crimes by Coalition Forces during the military campaign and occupation.
* Mumbai, January 2004 - World Court of Women on US War Crimes
* Copenhagen, March 2004 - Public hearing on the legality of war, legality of putting Iraq's public enterprises and resources on sale, legality of keeping over 20,000 people under arrest in camps and prisons in the absence of any legal procedure.
* Brussels, April 14-17, 2004 - the BRussels Tribunal hearings focused on the programs and policies of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), its role in the war against Iraq, and the role of the war against Iraq as part of the PNAC's program of military domination of the Earth <1>
* New York, May 2004 - Session on the legality of the war – violation of international law and the UN – violation of the will of the peoples of the world as manifested on February 15, war crimes and crimes under occupation.
* Japan, hearings throughout the year in various cities, two courts in July and December 2004 - International Criminal Tribunal on Iraq (ICTI)
* Germany, series of hearings around Germany starting June 2004 - Focus on violations of international law and complicity of German government—covering sanctions, war and occupation.
* Istanbul, June 2004 - Symposium on crimes committed against cultural heritage.
* New York, August 2004 - Session investigating violations of international law and basic human rights by US President George W. Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair administrations in launching the war against Iraq and instituting the occupation. Findings of other WTI sessions, military families and GI resisters.
* Hiroshima, October 2004 - Session on depleted uranium and complicity of Japanese government.
* Lisbon, Fall 2004 - Commission of inquiry to determine the responsibility of the Portuguese State and other entities/individuals in the preparation of the invasion, during the invasion and in the occupation of Iraq; to formulate the accusation of those who perpetrated crimes against the people of Iraq.
* Stockholm, November 2004 - Session examinign the impact of occupation on Iraqi society, including the social, economic and cultural consequences.
* Beirut, December 2004 - Arab Court on Iraq.
* London, February 2004 - A Peoples' Inquiry into the occupation of Iraq by Coalition Forces
* Rome, February 2005 - Session on Media Wrongs against Truth and Humanity: the politics of disinformation.
* Genoa, January 2005 - Session on Media and Disinformation
* Rome, December 2004 - Session on legality of war.
* Istanbul, 20 March 2005 – Culminating session

The Istanbul session served as the culmination of the WTI process, taking into account the entirety of the above tribunal sessions. Based on this also, the session will take the further step of examining and exposing the implications of WTI findings.

* Istanbul session 23-27 JUNE 2005: Declaration of the Jury of Conscience (WTI)

"The invasion and occupation of Iraq was and is illegal. The reasons given by the US and UK governments for the invasion and occupation of Iraq in March 2003 have proven to be false. Much evidence supports the conclusion that a major motive for the war was to control and dominate the Middle East and its vast reserves of oil as a part of the US drive for global hegemony." ..... In pursuit of their agenda of empire, the Bush and Blair governments blatantly ignored the massive opposition to the war expressed by millions of people around the world. They embarked upon one of the most unjust, immoral, and cowardly wars in history.(emphasis added)<2>

Also incorporated into the process are the findings of:

* Spanish Tribunal Against the War in Iraq – May 2003
* Decision on juridical issues about the war against Iraq and its occupation by Allied powers (with emphasis on the position of the government of Costa Rica) – Costa Rica September 2003

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Tribunal_on_Iraq


This is good, but we need a World Tribunal with a more comprehensive focus.

International Deep State Tribunal?

[Beam Me Up]

73. Wow, thanks for that.

Very interesting. The only problem I have is not everyone who may be of importance is going to be willing to come forward voluntarily -- for a lot of reasons, not only because they might be implicated in some way. It seems to me that a tribunal without the power of subpoena is very limited.

One thing I'm observing is that in many respects we're in whole new territory. I think one of the things that is happening is many of the fundamental systems that have grown up within European civilization are reaching the end of their life cycle. Take, for example, the relationship between the invention of the printing press and, later, the implementation of printed currency -- all of which made the expansion of European influence around the globe possible. But look what has happened in just the past few years in this regard. Banking and a large portion of our economic exchanges are now done electronically. Just as newspapers are being supplanted by this constant exchange of information into which we, here, are all tied, so to, is there a continual flow of symbols of wealth which have no tangible aspect.

I'm suggesting even this is just the surface of the matter. What we're really looking at is a pending, radical shift in the structures of civilization itself -- including our own understandings of "governance" -- which are currently rooted in a system dating back to the 1700s. This system is increasingly antiquated -- and this is a problem for a very small but powerful minority who are used to hierarchical controls. I'm not sure I can accurately outline what I'm sensing but it looks to me like there is a last gasp effort to retain hierarchy through the use of technology that may be inherently anti-hierarchical. They are afraid of losing control of a system within which their titles, their wealth, their positions of power, even their sense of personal and familial identity are intricately woven. I'm not sure of this but it certainly looks that way to me.

Where I'm going with this is it may be that the forms that have worked in the past to bring about significant and substantive social changes are already dated, perhaps even irrelevant. Even now, some things break through into the public consciousness and catch their attention that are completely outside the (controlled) "main stream" of information flow.

Does this make any sense to you?

Clearly there remains a top-down dominance of what we might call "social credibility" -- but I see that weakening significantly.

[OneGrassRoot]

77. I follow, and I -- once again -- agree, Beam Me Up....

Geez,this may be one of THE most fascinating threads I've read, and that is SAYING something.

It does feel as though we're in uncharted territory and while terrifying to think of a collapse of our basic structures, quite frankly it feels as though it may be necessary to move forward with any semblance of integrity. Things have disintegrated so much.

It's like you need to treat the disease, not the symptom; the symptoms may get worse, but it's necessary in order to bring the disease process to the surface to finally heal.

[Beam Me Up]

66. You ask what I think.

I am of the Vietnam era but that was a very optimistic time, culturally. There was a sense that real, substantive, changes were possible. Subsequently I came to the conclusion that we vastly underestimated the "enemy" which, in those days, was mostly referred to as "the system". What was being referred to, however, was mostly the visible "system" -- not fully understanding or taking into account its deeper aspects.

Things are a bit different now, at least for some of us. Although we know less than we ought to, we know far more than we once did. I'm still unable to wrap my head around the whole thing -- and I suppose that is true for everyone -- but the big difference is we're now able to share information far more broadly and rapidly than ever before. The inverse, of course, is also true: Disinformation can be injected and spread very rapidly as well. This requires not only constant vigilance but re-adaptation to the content of whatever information stream one swims in. However, I think internet politics is having an affect -- that much of what we can see operating, even through the corporate media/political circus is at least in part in reaction to this. Frankly, I don't think Obama would be president without it. I think those of us who are aware at all have a far clearer sense of what we're up against now than we ever have. What we do NOT have, IMO, is an equally clear sense of "us". The self-image that is reflected back to us through corporate media isn't accurate. They don't want us to know how influential we could potentially be. Moreover, we see now trying to hijack certain aspects of this general movement for substantive change by borrowing the form and recasting its focus -- following my motto that the best way to thwart a revolution is to lead it.

I have some hope and I think what you're pointing toward with the Russell Tribunal could be a real possibility. I know a few people, Peter Dale Scott, for example, who might be interested in at least considering what would be necessary for something like that to come about.

As for Holder, I just don't know what to think except in a very general way. A lot of "ducks" have to be "in a row" for things to change from within the system itself. There are so many things I'd like to talk about but can't. There are certain people who have been identified that need to be subpoenaed and give testimony under oath in front of a grand jury. I know nothing about how that process works and wish someone would tell me because it isn't for lack of potential witnesses and other significant evidence. The edifice of the established narrative has already been significantly breached. All it is going to take is some brave persons in positions of authority who are capable of poking into that breach, widening it, deepening it, reinforcing it in such a way it can't be merely filled in and covered over or waved away with a "nothing to see here" of the hand. In my mind, this is all doable -- provided the "ducks" are lined up.

Apologies for the necessary circumspection.

[robertpaulsen]

79. Thank you very much. Circumspection is an understandable quality in my book.

And while such a tribunal would probably necessitate avoiding a sense of hierarchy, my first thought of a head for such a tribunal was also Peter Dale Scott.

You're hitting some valid and important points. In addition to having a strong sense of what constitutes "us", there needs to be a strong sense of direction: what are our goals? Understanding those points will definitely help defend against mole infiltration. That and making sure that there isn't a rigid sense of hierarchy to avoid against a thwarted revolution via megalomania, or some other variation of what you warn against.

Unfortunately, the Corporate Media thrives on petty divisions, which is why we need to turn to them as little as possible in arriving at a sense of what constitutes "us". I would love to discuss this further, but other responsibilities are forcing me to log off. I can't wait to continue this discussion tomorrow. Thank you so much for your insight into where we've been, what we face, and where we need to go!

[H2O Man]

45. Sibel Edmonds .....

For a few years, I placed more focus on the Wilsons, than the other related scandals. The good works of a few DUers convinced me that understanding her place in the larger context was equally important. Perhaps that is why the media almost completely ignores her. I'm reminded of the "blackouts" of certain people in the former Soviet Union.

[Lena inRI]

94. Wasn't Cheney's secret energy task force the keystone?

First off, kudos to you, H2O; what a pivotal OP you have posted here because it helps us all unravel what has really entangled our American democratic republic these past 8 years.

My vote for THE CRUX of the Six Dimensions would be Dick Cheney. . .that simple.

All roads or tentacles lead to "the Cheney"

We had our first, and I hope last, caudillo, "strong-man rule" especially once our courts prove he ordered assassinations, yep. . .CAUDILLO CHENEY.

Now, with backing and leadership from an Obama administration, we grass root citizens are ideally poised to wrestle down the Cheney octopus, aka Bush-Cheney criminal syndicate. . .



(Replace Standard oil with Dick Cheney in this Udo Keppler cartoon in Puck magazine, 7 Sept 1904)

Note the Darth Vader eyes. . .perfectly recyclable cartoon for our times.

That's why any court case. . .be it for torture, illegal wiretapping, AIPAC spying, and yes even the 9-11-mother-of-all inquiries. . .

WILL LEAD TO CHENEY !

:smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke: :smoke:

[OneGrassRoot]

135. What's the latest with that Energy Task Force anyway?

If that will be declassified soon...on the heels of the torture memos, THAT could be explosive.

You and H20Man are right, though: All Roads Paved to Hell start with Cheney.

[Lena inRI]

148. Apparently, names of participants were released. . .

. . .and Cheney's role was confirmed as behind-the-scenes but in full control yet I think Cheney still has an appeal out there.

See if you can figure out the legalese at this link about the released documents from this task force of 2001:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2099569/

Here's where I'm not sure if an appeal is still pending even though a final commission report was released already (link to it in above article link):

"When Cheney was ordered to produce the rosters and minutes of these meetings as part of pretrial discovery, he appealed that order all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court."

"So, how do you get to the Supreme Court? Mandamus, mandamus, mandamus. The government leapfrogged over the usual procedures and filed for extraordinary relief--in the form of a writ of mandamus--in the appeals court. And when the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied that writ, noting that the case needed to be fully decided in the lower court first, Cheney took the up elevator to the Supreme Court instead of the down elevator back to the trial court."

"This becomes one of the key issues in Cheney v. U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. (That's right, he's named the lower court as his opponent.) It's a bedrock legal principle that courts of appeals don't decide issues over which they have no jurisdiction, and that courts of appeals don't decide cases when there has been no final decision from a lower court, unless there's a pretty good reason."

I like what Paul Krugman had to say about secretive Cheney:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/27/opinion/27KRUG.html

"As Linda Greenhouse recently pointed out in The New York Times, the legal arguments the administration is making for the secrecy of the energy task force are 'strikingly similar' to those it makes for its right to detain, without trial, anyone it deems an enemy combatant."

"What Mr. Cheney is defending, in other words, is a doctrine that makes the United States a sort of elected dictatorship: a system in which the president, once in office, can do whatever he likes, and isn't obliged to consult or inform either Congress or the public."

Whatever, all the above confirms my belief that Cheney is the keystone holding up all the Six Dimensions of Bush Scandals.

[robertpaulsen]

139. Fantastic cartoon! That's the same conclusion I came to.

I'm not sure if you've read it before, but if you have the time, click the links on my signature to the 1st or 2nd edition of American Judas. Cheney is indeed at the crux of the hydra-headed scandal fomented by the Deep State. Some would call him "the Maestro".

[Lena inRI]

150. Glad to hear you agree. . .

. . .and your choice of metaphors for Cheney ("Hydra-head" and "the Maestro") are just as good as "caudillo". . .I just picked "caudillo" to alliterate with "Cheney" plus he probably figured he'd emulate the Latin American dictator model he dealt with from his Iran-Contra days. . .

INVESTIGATE. . .INDICT. . .IMPRISON the Six Dimension Scandal Keystone = C H E N E Y !

:fistbump: :fistbump: :fistbump: :fistbump: :fistbump:

[robertpaulsen]

151. Oh yeah! I like Caudillo Cheney too!

It's important that everyone understands his central importance in everything. And thanks for bringing up Iran-Contra because that connects with this scandal too!

[Usrename]

149. We know the 9/11 Commission Report was a tortured document.

Other than that tidbit, I'll respect your request.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hootinholler]

5. "It's curious that there is so much opposition to the rule of law"

Even more so when you consider how capricious its application has been over the last 40 years or so. So many squandered opportunities to set things aright.

I wonder what it will take to actually wake the sleeping giant that is, the general population.

Thanks again for your cogent musings.

-Hoot

[H2O Man]

16. Right.

This was the second generation of the Iran-Contra scandal.

[hootinholler]

24. LOL

Or the third generation of Watergate. ;)

-Hoot

[Beam Me Up]

78. And one has to question

what connection there may have been between the Plumbers and the JFK assassination.

I think plenty and I think that is what REALLY scared them.

[NBachers]

100. Or the fourth generation of the Kennedy Assassinations

I really, really feel a certain ice-breaking river-moving quality here.

Thanks, Waterman; and everyone.

[bluelamp]

156. and maybe things are lurking in the Bushes...

from Sott.net:

...this leads us to consideration of the role of George H. W. Bush in the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and the role of his son in the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center. Let us consider these points:

Although he does not recall when asked, George (Herbert Walker) Bush was in Dallas the day JFK was assassinated.

Bush lies about the fact that he was a high-ranking CIA official at the time of JFK's death.

Bush allowed the escape of a convicted terrorist from prison to go to work for him as an undercover CIA asset in Iran-Contra.

Bush released another convicted terrorist.

Both these terrorists were present on Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963.

Both these terrorists were convicted for killing 73 people by blowing up an airliner.

Bush is personal friends with a close associate of these convicted terrorists, who was also a participant in Iran Contra.

Bush took a leading role as CIA official in structuring/organizing these terrorists in effective organizations.

Now, with just those items, would we be at all surprised to discover the connections between Bush Junior and the CIA asset/patsy Osama bin Laden?

"To the stock objection that it would be virtually impossible to assemble a murder conspiracy without leakage, the response is that an existing conspiratorial network or system of networks, already in place and capable of murder, would have much less difficulty in maintaining the discipline of secrecy." - Author Peter Dale Scott in "Deep Politics and The Death of JFK"

In 1962, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Lyman Lemnitzer, endorsed Operation Northwoods, a plot to gather public support for military intervention in Cuba. The plot called for acts of terrorism against the United States, including the development of a "terror campaign". We begin to realize that Kennedy wasn't just talking about Communists "over there" when he said we face a "monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence...

Course Cheney had his own Operation Northwoods/Pearl Harbor terror plans against yourself with the PNAC document.

Add in the incredible magic bullet and incredible 757 eating small hole in the Pentagon and it certainly makes one wonder?

[shraby]

2. I'm glad you wrote this up Waterman. I remember

the ins and outs of that story and the newbies should be informed. Thank you.

[H2O Man]

8. Well, thank you!

I've seen a few interesting OPs/threads on this topic in the past couple of days. Maybe we can get something like the old "Plame Threads" going.

[DemReadingDU]

17. I would like that!

I so enjoyed how you wrote about the "Plame Threads" explaining all the people and how they were linked to each other. I learned a lot from them.

I would hope you could write similar threads tying together Harman, Cheney, Feith, and others. This is a great introduction!


edit to correct Harman's name. oops

[G_j]

6. K&R!

"no presidential scandal ever happens in a vacuum"


so true..

and one can also find connections to Iran-Contra

[H2O Man]

56. Right.

This really is a mutated extension of Iran-Contra.

[dalaigh lllama]

7. There wer so many cases of "outraged" speeches by members of Congress

that morphed into "no, everything is ok" shortly thereafter that one always wondered if someone had graymailed them, as you say. Specter is one that comes to mind. How many times thru the years did his outrage about something float away on the wind within days?

[rateyes]

128. You do remember that Specter was a member of the Warren Commision, don't you?

Hmmmmm.

[bleever]

9. Cheney's use of the CIA as a cut-out is falling apart.

Even while it's reported today that it was the CIA who requested to use waterboarding, the same reports are explicitly stating the involvement of Condi Rice and the "highest levels" of the administration.

Nobody is buying that the CIA came up with the idea that we ought to torture.


Thank you for this excellent overview of this six-headed monster. I don't think we'll be surprised to see it sprout more heads.

[immoderate]

11. K&R. Thanks.

--imm

[Kaleko]

12. Is it too much to ask for true justice?

We should absolutely demand it while knowing that the full extent of the depravity and duplicity of our lawmakers will never be completely exposed.

One question: Isn't there at least one level above top secret, if not several?

[ljm2002]

102. Re, "isn't there one level above Top Secret?"

Not exactly. The classification of Top Secret can be further divided up into compartments, for example, "Top Secret NOFORN" means it is Top Secret and is not to be seen by anyone foreign. There are many others. "Top Secret EYES ONLY" means it only goes to one person. So when you hear people talk about Top Secret Compartmentalized, that is what they are talking about. In a sense it is more than "just" Top Secret. But it is at the same hierarchical level. But the head of the Navy may be able to see Top Secret information that the head of the Army will never see -- and vice versa.

Such an interesting thread -- I don't have much to add to the other aspects of it except to cheer y'all on!

[robertpaulsen]

13. I think Sibel Edmonds can also provide some context for this discussion.

Luke Ryland posted her most recent interview. This snippet provides some interesting info:


The Turkish / Israeli Lobby

GK: ...It seems that the Turkish lobbying effort has copied the model of the Israeli Lobby

SE: Well, the Turkish lobby in the US was set up - at least the largest and most successful one - the American Turkish Council (ATC) was actually set up by the neocons. In either 1987 or 1988, Douglas Feith and Richard Perle went to Turkey and had some high-level meetings there, and then they came back to the US and they set up this lobbying firm called International Advisors Inc, IAI. It was also registered under FARA - Foreign Agents Registration Act - and they were representing the government of Turkey.

And the office of this lobby was located next to one of the main Israeli lobby groups, in the same building, on the same floor. And Richard Perle and Douglas Feith were actually working with both offices. In fact, the rent - and this was referred to in an article, I believe by the Wall Street Journal in 1993, 1994 - was paid by this particular Israeli lobby group. Then after this was exposed by the Wall Street Journal, because I believe at the time Richard Perle either had some advisory position with the Defense Department, it kind of became scandalous after the story came out, so they shut it down.

They shut down IAI in 1994, and in 1994 they got together with several other well-known neocons, and they set up the American Turkish Council instead. So from that date on, you would constantly see Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and even at that time, Larry Franklin, as familiar figures in ATC's meetings, and this was again in their first year, 1994.

And even as far as the accounting firms are concerned, both AIPAC and the ATC used the same financial advisors for their accounting. And then of course, you go and look at their members, and things become even more clear. So, 'Yes' to answer your question, you will see the same people involved both with the Israel lobby, the neocons, and also with the Turkish lobby, the center of which is the ATC. And just like the Israeli lobby, they were very smart, and they were modeled the same way. Because in addition to the ATC, they also set up another organization called ATA - the Association of Turkish Americans, with chapters in every 50 states, and more than several offices in each state in different cities, and if you go and look at their websites they have ATA-DC, ATA-Chicago, and so on, which again is modeled after the same Israeli lobby. And a lot of their - I would refer to it as - less than clean, the dirty activities actually are carried out through ATA and their chapters and their branches that have basically established themselves all over the country.

http://letsibeledmondsspeak.blogspot.com/2009/04/sibel-edmonds-interviewed-by-electric.html


I haven't listened to the entire interview, but one point Sibel Edmonds makes that I think is very salient is that these Six Dimensions of Scandal that you elaborate on are all tied into what Peter Dale Scott refers to as the Deep State. An intersection of Politics, Organized Crime and Corporate Power that is entrenched on an international level that crosses all boundaries. No country, no party, no system of government is immune. That is why initiating prosecution of this multi-dimensional scandal is so difficult. But as a veteran Plame Thread poster checking in, I am still up to the challenge!

[DemReadingDU]

21. Thanks for the Sibel link

It's been months since Luke has posted anything. Though checking now, he has posted a couple entries in the past week.

I've wondered about the former speaker Hastert, and if was linked to Harman?



edit to correct Harman's name. oops

[robertpaulsen]

26. Good question. Larisa Alexandrovna noticed that connection.

Larisa Alexandrovna: Hastert Informed of Harman Investigation?

http://www.atlargely.com/2009/04/hastert-informed-of-harman-investigation.html

April 20, 2009

Hastert informed of Harman investigation?

Oh my, here is something new from Laura Rozen about the Jane Harman revelations:

A former intelligence official familiar with the matter told Foreign Policy on condition of anonymity Monday that Goss had been asked due to the unavailability of FBI director Robert Mueller to certify a FISA warrant that was seemingly triggered by a captured communication between Harman and someone who was already being surveilled by the U.S. intelligence community (presumably, the suspected "Israeli agent"). Furthermore, the former intelligence official said, longstanding protocol involving the separation of powers required that when intelligence exists that includes a member of Congress, that the heads of the body in which that member sits, in this case, the top Republican and Democratic in the House of Representatives, then House speaker Denny Hastert (R-IL) and minority leader Nancy Pelosi, (D-CA) be informed.

So former House speaker Denny Hastert was informed of the investigation into Harman? I find this amazing really. This man has allegedly sold classified information to the American Turkish Council and allegedly taken briefcases full of cash for votes. This man was allegedly caught by FBI surveillance monitoring Turkish nationals of dubious reputation in the middle of a cash bribe and he is notified of Harman's indiscretion? Why is no one making the point here regarding Hastert? Not Rozen, not anyone. Does no one find this a bit perverse?

Think about this. The third person in the chain of command, after the president and vice president, was allegedly selling classified information to ATC using third party thugs as middle-men (read Turkish mafia). He was allegedly being bribed for votes on foreign policy issues involving Turkey and Armenia. The then Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales instead of investigating Hastert, informs him that a Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee made what appears to be a deal or at the very least, had an improper communication with a foreign lobbyist.

The then-AG does not investigate this either, rather, uses it for political blackmail. So if Gonzales was not going to investigate Harman, why did he inform Hastert? And why is Hastert no longer being investigated? Because he was up until Bush came into office and John Ashcroft became the first DOJ patsy, before Gonzales, of that 8-year long absence of justice. Was Hastert cleared? If so, by whom and on what charges? I have never been able to confirm that he was cleared. I was able to confirm that there was an investigation through the Chicago office of the FBI, but not that Hastert was cleared.

Whatever Harman agreed to, and at the very least, she did have an inappropriate conversation, if Stein's article is accurate - and I believe it is, she did not engage in the kind of alleged crimes that Hastert was said to have engaged in. So why is no one discussing the issue of Hastert and what we now know of him being informed of Harman's alleged conversation? Does no one think this is important? Or is it that since Hastert is no longer in Congress, it does not matter? Since when have crimes stopped being crimes just because the person allegedly committing the crimes resigns?

Finally, in reference to Porter Goss and his version of reality, I do not now, nor did I during his tenture as DCI find him an honest broker. Why? Because he is an Agency man first and always. What I mean by this is that he was never a loyal American risking his life to make sure America was safe. No, he was never that. There are those in the Agency who are very much a person willing to die for their country. Goss and his gang were never that type of person. He was willing to risk a good deal for the CIA as a territory onto itself and certain business interests aligned with certain Agency interests.

If you watched the film The Good Shepherd, starring Matt Damon, Robert De Niro and other all-stars, you will recall a line at the end of the film:

I remember a senator once asked me. When we talk about "CIA" why we never use the word "the" in front of it. And I asked him, do you put the word "the" in front of "God"?"

The adviser for the film is former major spook Milton Beardon and he told me a few years back that he is the one who wrote that line for the film.

You see, the statement perfectly captures the old-boys club that certain Agency employees seem to value more than their nation and the lives they are tasked with protecting. I believe strongly that Porter Goss is this verity of spook rather than someone like Beardon whom I greatly respect or Bob Bear, also someone I greatly respect. There are others too whose names I cannot list, but whose service to this country is imesurable and to whom we owe a great deal of grattitude. But Goss is not one of these people in my opinion.

The major issue for me with regard to Goss is his friendship with right-wing Cuban terrorists. This is a problem for me and should be for anyone who considers terrorism not from a political perspective, but from the reality of what terrorism is and who funds it.

Think about this, how often does someone who is not a criminal have a dinner party with people who are? I don't mean any criminals either. I mean the likes of Watergate burglars (after the photo below was taken obviously), well known assassins, and drug runners. Take a look at the below photo and tell me who you recognize at this table:

PHOTO AT LINK

So Goss' version of reality has little credibility for me and should not be something to consider when trying to unravel Bush era-Agency criminal activity. If anything, Goss was likely cleaning up, not stepping in because the FBI Director was not around.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5500098

[seemslikeadream]

33. and he has recently become a lobbist for Turkey

[DemReadingDU]

37. How convenient!

:eyes:

[robertpaulsen]

41. Digusting.

And why is Dick Gephardt joined in a sub-contract with this criminal?



Hastert Contracted to Lobby for Turkey

Friday 10 April 2009

by: Kevin Bogardus | Visit article original @ The Hill

photo
Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois) will represent the government of Turkey on many bi-lateral issues, including a resolution before the US Congress on the mass killing of Armenian citizens in Turkey during the 1900's. (Photo: Getty Images)

The Turkish government has signed another prominent former congressional leader to join its K Street team.

Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and others at his firm, Dickstein Shapiro, are working on a $35,000-per-month contract for Turkey, according to records on file with the Justice Department.

Hastert was the longest-serving Republican House Speaker until he retired from his seat after the 2006 midterm elections. He joined Dickstein in June 2008.

The agreement is a subcontract between Hastert s firm and the Gephardt Group, founded by Richard Gephardt, the ex-Missouri congressman who was the Democratic House leader for several years. Gephardt and others at DLA Piper replaced the Livingston Group, longtime lobbyists for Turkey, as its Washington representatives last year.

http://www.truthout.org/041209E

[H2O Man]

43. Dick

played the key role in derailing then Senator Joseph Biden's attempt to restrain the Bush-Cheney insistance that the US invade & occupy Iraq, before UN inspections could be completed. Those inspections, of course, were going to show that Saddam had no WMD.

[robertpaulsen]

47. What a shame.

A real shame since I admired the work he has done over the years on behalf of labor. Too bad he can't show more backbone where foreign policy is concerned.

[H2O Man]

48. I always thought

he could have served best as labor secretary. But he was intent on securing the '04 nomination as the democratic candidate for president. And he sold out on the party, the good members of Congress, and his own conscience.

[robertpaulsen]

57. Luke Ryland uncovered a delicious piece of Turkish scandal: First Merchant Bank

Thursday, April 23, 2009
First Merchant Bank exposed
A partial transcript of Sibel's recent interview is now up at Let Sibel Edmonds Speak.

snip

In August 2004, US Treasury blacklisted First Merchant Bank because:

Pursuant to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act, FinCEN (Treasury) found First Merchant Bank to be of primary money laundering concern based on a number of factors, including:
(1) it is licensed as an offshore bank in the TRNC, a jurisdiction with inadequate anti-money laundering controls, particularly those applicable to its offshore sector; (2) it is involved in the marketing and sale of fraudulent financial products and services;
(3) it has been used as a conduit for the laundering of fraudulently obtained funds; and
(4) the individuals who own, control, and operate to launder criminal proceeds.

All of which is apparently true. The problem is that this was all publicly known at least as far back as 1997, when a member of the Susurluk Commission said that First Merchant Bank was being used to launder money and finance terrorism for the "Susurluk Gang."

snip

Why would the US government be slow to act when it came to shutting down First Merchant Bank?

There are some clues in the recent interview. Sibel states that, based on information that she has first-hand knowledge of, First Merchant Bank was used by "US government agencies," "certain US government people," "certain non-profit organizations in the US," "certain US institutions including banking institutions," and "certain US-based organizations" to launder and distribute money.

Some of the money was undoubtedly sent back to the US. Some of this money went to finance various Turkish/Israeli 'lobbying' efforts, including the American Turkish Council, the Assembly of Turkish American Associations, and the Turkish American Cultural Alliance. Some of this money financed various 'lobbying' groups including ex-House Speaker Bob Livingston's The Livingston Group and ex-congressman Stephen Solarz's various lobbying companies. Some of this money was shovelled into "campaign contributions – legal and illegal, declared and undeclared" for congress members, including Roy Blunt, Tom Lantos, and Dan Burton. Some of this money was simply stuffed into suitcases for ex-House Speaker Dennis Hastert, and presumably others. And of course, most of this money simply went into personal bank accounts via First Merchant Bank's correspondent banks "including JP Morgan Chase, BNP Paribas, Doha Bank, Mizuho, Riyad Bank, and UBS."

much more...

http://lukery.blogspot.com/2009/04/first-merchant-bank-exposed.html

[H2O Man]

58. The quality of his work

is second to none.

[robertpaulsen]

61. And proof that the American MSM is paid to be asleep at the wheel.

How hard could it have been for a truly independent enterprising reporter to have uncovered the facts on this in the period between 1996, when the Susurluk scandal broke, and 2004 when the Feds decidedly to officially break all ties? This paragraph in particular caught my eye:

The Susurluk scandal began with an automobile accident in Susurluk, Turkey, on November 3, 1996. Four people occupied the automobile: The deputy police chief of Istanbul; an alleged "extreme nationalist hit man'' previously convicted of heroin trafficking and wanted for terrorism; the hit man's girlfriend...; and a member of the Turkish Parliament, whose private militia had helped the army fight Kurdish militants.... The trunk of the car was full of weapons.

Given the sensationalistic nature of our media, how did this slip by MSM? Who put the lid on that story in America? Could it possibly have been our Ambassador to Turkey at that time, a cretin by the name of Marc Grossman?

[robertpaulsen]

65. He saves the most shocking revelation for last: LARRY FRANKLIN IS NOT IN JAIL!

I almost missed this in the last paragraph:

One other interesting part of the interview, highlighted by Mizgin, is that indicted spy Larry Franklin was working with Richard Perle and Douglas Feith at the ATC way back in 1994. According to Sibel, Franklin was "one of the top people providing information and packages during 2000 and 2001." Despite many media reports to the contrary, Larry Franklin is not currently in jail, and it is not clear what will happen to him if the trial of Rosen & Weissman from AIPAC doesn't proceed as planned in June.

http://lukery.blogspot.com/2009/04/first-merchant-bank-exposed.html

I clicked on the link where I boldprinted and this came up:

Inmate Locator - Locate Federal inmates from 1982 to present
Name Register # Age-Race-Sex Release Date
Location
1. LAWRENCE ANTHONY FRANKLIN 70425-083 62-White-M UNKNOWN NOT IN BOP CUSTODY(emphasis added)

http://www.bop.gov/iloc2/InmateFinderServlet?Transaction=NameSearch&needingMoreList=false&FirstName=Lawrence&Middle=Anthony&LastName=Franklin&Race=U&Sex=U&Age=&x=68&y=14


While everyone was debating whether LameDuck Bush would pardon Libby, I had my eyes on Franklin. I assumed he was rotting in prison and would have the most to gain cutting a deal with DoJ and singing like a canary. I guess the Vulcans found alternate means of pacifying him.

Where the hell could he have disappeared to?!

[H2O Man]

89. Hey, RP:

Did you know that Judith Miller is now using Fox News/ Sean Hannity as the vehicle to spread disinformation? Not surprising, I suppose.

[robertpaulsen]

129. HA!

Like Glenn Beck, she has found the appropriate home for her.

Great to see this thread still near the top!

[H2O Man]

42. No coincidence there.

Some things are just so obvious.

As always, I recognize that you deserve a special thanks on this topic. More than any other DUer -- probably more than everyone else here -- you have been responsible for keeping our attention focused in this scandal.

[Stephanie]

80. Doug Feith, still the Fucking Stupidest Guy on the Face of the Earth

http://www.slate.com/id/2099277/

[robertpaulsen]

141. I found an interesting site for Douglas Feith news.

http://www.havenworks.com/people/a-z/f/feith-douglas-j/

[go west young man]

157. Link to a great radio interview from Antiwar.com

regarding Jane Harman, Turkey, and Israel. http://antiwar.com/radio/2009/04/23/philip-giraldi-21/

Excerpt- PG: Well, it’s not through the Looking Glass, because obviously they felt that that was the way to go. And, you know, there are a lot of other people that see the US in the same way. For example, let’s go back to our Turkish example. Why are the Turks so cozy with Israel? Do they have any real community of interest? You know, they have some common enemies in the area and so forth, but the big reason is that being chummy with the Israelis is a big plus for the Turks vis-a-vis the US. So a lot of people have seen our foreign policy as having this kind of key in the door which is the Israeli relationship, the Israeli connection, and clearly this was very plausible that the Israelis would be able to make these things happen. And even a canny operator in the political sphere like Jane Harman was convinced that it would work.

SH: I guess the message here is that the American people are just not responsible enough to maintain a world empire, because the incentive for the leaders of every other country to exert extraordinary influence in order to try to influence this empire apparently outmatches the American people every time.

PG: And our politicians are so corrupt and so motivated by their own interest that it makes it easy to manipulate them. I suspect that’s a big part of it too. But you know this whole Israeli thing has been going on for so long, and they’ve been so successful at it, that they just kind of feel that at certain levels they are bullet-proof, and they can do what they want, they can manipulate the situation to satisfy their own needs. And I think, in this case, I think the story has real legs and I think this is something that maybe is not going to go away no matter how hard Fox News and some of the others try to make it go.
<…>

[Spazito]

18. Excellent OP, H2O Man....

The time to connect all those 'dots' is now, nothing was done in isolation of the 'other'. I remember quite well the DU threads when the PNAC plan to 're-make' the Middle East was discussed here as was, of course, the Plame betrayal.

Actions do, indeed, have consequences as you have so eloquently expressed.

[cali]

19. this is a must read. thanks for it.

k&r

[H2O Man]

46. Thanks.

I saw where you posted about Condi Rice's role, and appreciated that. She was definitely on board, and was an active member of the conspiracies. While she alone did not have the authority to give the okay on torture, she was very near the top of the chain of command. She had unlimited access to Bush.

[goclark]

130. Condi was "The Brain Of Bush" because he had no brain ~

IMO,she was the one that looked innocent but really was pulling the strings to have him give the OK to the evil that was done.

[cliffordu]

22. Bookmarked and K&R'd

Breathtaking piece, H20man

[SpiralHawk]

28. The k and the r

eom

[myrna minx]

29. Thank you for this great essay. K&R n/t

[EmeraldCityGrl]

31. K&R Outstanding!

[EmeraldCityGrl]

34. Does anyone remember the

appointment of Elizabeth Cheney to the the Iran-Syria Operations Group (ISOG). She was given a multi-million dollar budget to create regime change in Iran.

I have always thought there was more to this story and a potential for scandal. The very thought of the vice-presidents daughter put in charge of this has always
seemed astonishing to me.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_allen_l__060412_cheney_s_secret_iran.htm

Old DU post on the subject...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x2572494

[democrank]

38. Thank you for this, H20 Man

I always appreciate your writings.

[spanone]

39. Nominated!

[Bobbie Jo]

40. Yes, Thank You! K&R

:kick:

[Uncle Joe]

49. Well done, H2O Man.

Thanks for the thread.:thumbsup:

[tom_paine]

52. You write some excellent posts, and this is among the best of that august company.

Well said, sir!

:toast: :patriot:

[malaise]

55. A super post H2O Man

and it's not too much to ask.

[grantcart]

59. The most telling point of this OP is the huge contrast between those 8 years

and the open intelligent administration that we now have.

[jazzjunkysue]

60. Bolton, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, Cheney, Baker, Miers, all signed on with

PNAC back in '97 to ask Clinton to invade Iraq. Just start with all of George's appointees, and look for their connection to the old Nixon/Bush/Kissinger gang.

It's not hard to see the family tree in action. Look at corporation boards for special appointments and then who owns/runs/advises the major networks/radio/newspapers.

This is all out in the open. You don't need a theory: It's all out there.

PNAC just recently took down their site, but for years, they posted the famous letter to Clinton with all their names on it. Kristal, Perle. They were proud of all this.

Many people don't know how they got organized: They came into power during the Russian cold war, and when Russia fell overnight under the weight of it's own failure, they were marginalized. So they cooked up Unipolarism, to replace the old 2 super power structure. And our economy is failing even before we got to start a war with the second country.

Here's the book, available at any store:

http://books.google.com/books?id=xqKCJAAACAAJ&dq=unipolarism+imperial&lr=

Imperial Designs By Gary J. Dorrien

In the waning months of the cold war, shortly before an expiring Soviet Union finally disintegrated, a group of neoconservative policymakers and intellectuals began to argue that the moment had come to create an American-dominated world order. Some of them called it "the unipolarist imperative." Instead of reducing military spending, they contended, the United States needed to expand its military reach to every region of the world, using America's tremendous military and economic power to create a new Pax Americana. This book describes how the ideology of American global preeminence originated during the presidency of George H. W. Bush, developed in the 1990s, gained power with the election of George W. Bush, and reshaped American foreign policy after September 11, 2001.
Structured as a narrative, this account deals with government policymakers and outside advocates. It tells the story of the development of unipolarist ideology and its role in recent American Foreign policy. It makes an argument about the nature and problems of this ideology, emphasizing that an unrivaled superpower makes the whole world its geopolitical neighborhood. It offers a critique of the unilateralist militarism of the second Bush administration. And it contends that the problem of imperial expansiveness, though dramatically heightened by the Bush administration, did not begin with it. The problem is inherent in the anxiety of being a global hegemon.
http://bks9.books.google.com/books?id=xqKCJAAACAAJ&printsec=frontcover&img=1&zoom=1&sig=ACfU3U3C9gUf43-Uotw9KJfRQjjmRgbnDQ


More details
Imperial Designs: Neoconservatism and the New Pax Americana
By Gary J. Dorrien
Edition: illustrated
Published by Routledge, 2004
ISBN 0415949807, 9780415949804
298 pages

[robertpaulsen]

62. Looks like a great book!

Off the top of my head, I believe that PNAC grew out of AEI:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=American_Enterprise_Institute

Just one look at the personnel, fellows and alumni is enough to induce instant retching.

There was a paper written in either 1992 or 93 that outlined the foreign policy goals the PNAC would eventually adopt. I can't remember whether the author was David Wurmser or Scooter Libby, but it was a real duzy that got the Crazies their nickname.

[jazzjunkysue]

63. The footnotes are about 1/3 of the book, and there's very little opinion.

It's all verifiable quotes from public speeches, articles, memos, books, you name it. You can look up every claim he makes.

Incredible indictment of the entire Bush Crime Syndicate.

Surprisingly, George didn't start out as a neo Con. He signed on on 9/12. They had been pusing him, but he finally buckled.

[robertpaulsen]

64. Yeah, I think that's when Dubya got religion too.

He was always the perfect corporate empty suit in which they neo-cons could manuever through Cheney, but I think the 9/11 attacks put him on a mission from God, in his own mind.

[OneGrassRoot]

74. Excellent, thank you so much! n/t

[Stephanie]

81. PNAC, for our new DUers

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=110&topic_id=80

[glitch]

98. And Jeb Bush signed onto PNAC too. I mention him because there have already been rumblings,

And I do NOT want Bush v.3

[robertpaulsen]

134. It was in 1992 that "The Crazies" outlined their plan for invading Iraq.

Did You Know that Scooter Libby Co-Authored a Paper in 1992 that Outlined Exactly the Kind of Invasion on Iraq that Took Place a Decade Later

July 04, 2007 by
Timothy Sexton

Scooter Libby Did More Than Just Perjure Himself and Put a CIA at Risk: He Helped Devise America's Current Foreign Policy of Unilateral Pre-Emptive Military Strikes

Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby will forever be tied together due to Cheney and Libby orchestrating the revenge upon a U.S. diplomat who had the gall to tell the world the turht about WMDs in Iraq, and due to the fact that because it pleased Dick Cheney the President of the United States took the unprecedented step of commuting the sentence of a convicted felon without going through proper judicial channels. But the Dick and Scooter show goes back well before they planned the outing of Valere Plame. In fact, Dick and Scooter both had input into a paper that outlined exactly what took place in Iraq following 9/11. Here's the kicker: That paper was written in 1992. Long before anyone other Karl Rove did anything other than snicker at the suggestion George W. Bush could actually be elected-or even appointed-President.

Following Bush the Elder's own Gulf War and his decision not to send troops into Baghdad to topple Saddam Hussein-because he understood that to do so without a plan for what to do with Iraq afterwards was the ultimate insanity-Dick, Scooter, Brent Scowcroft and Paul Wolfowitz all got together and outlined a plan for American world domination. This paper was titled Defense Planning Guidance and was actually co-authored by Scooter Libby, the poor little dickless wonder whose delicate constitution just couldn't take all that time in jail. Yes, when Scooter takes a dick up his ass, he prefers it to be the worm-sized variety connected to his boyfriend Dick Cheney instead of a prisoner nicknamed Goliath and not because he's tall. Poor wittle Scooter just couldn't bear the thought of being sodomized by someone who isn't white and fat.

Yes, poor little delicate Scooter Libby co-wrote this paper that outlined what America's foreign policy mission in the post-Cold War should look like. In between lathering up his rectum for a nightly visit from Dick Cheney, Scooter and his other butt buddy Paul Wolfowitz-yes, that same Paul Wolfowitz who arranged a cushy job for his bitch at the World Bank-took it upon themselves and their miniscule little brains to decide what American foreign policy should look like. Well, I certainly don't need to tell you what was in that paper. America should be prepared to unilaterally invade any country that was deemed to threaten America's global interests. While a coalition of support from other countries such as the first President Bush was able to put together was considered desirable, it was finally determined by those geniuses Libby and Wolfowitz to be less than necessary. In fact, if America's unilateral decision to invade another county alienated us from the rest of the world, Wolfowitz and Libby said, that was simply the price of protecting out interests.

When this paper was originally leaked the press it was met with such horror that it was turned over to the Secretary of Defense at the time to be rewritten so that it wasn't quite as controversial. It should give you an idea of the mindset of those who have been in charge of America's foreign policy the last six and a half years that the person they put in charge of making what was essentially an outline for America to conduct itself under the same rules as Nazi Germany was none other than Dick Cheney.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/302602/did_you_know_that_scooter_libby_coauthored.html?cat=75

[bluesmail]

67. A respectful K&R Thanks for the clarity of your writing. eom

[indimuse]

68. wow..

Thank you. :kick:NR!

[me b zola]

69. K&R

[scarletwoman]

71. Excellent OP, extraordinary thread -- rec'd of course.

I cannot say enough how much I appreciate all the hard investigative work that so many outstanding DUers have been doing over the years.

Thank you all,
sw

[stevedeshazer]

72. Brilliant.

Thanks.

[Mme. Defarge]

76. SO BE IT!

K&R

[Psychic Consortium]

82. Is Cheney still operating and in charge of his shadow government???

He acts like he is, or thinks he is.
But also acting like he is being backed into a corner.
Something is going on behind the scenes bigtime?

[H2O Man]

83. One of the potential

problems with any bureaucracy, is that even with new leadership at the top level, there are career people who are entrenched at the second and third tiers. This is nowhere more true than in Washington, DC. There have been recent reports about a loose-knit group of people who are still loyal to Cheney, and who report to him. I think it is safe to say that they still take orders from him, too.

[Psychic Consortium]

85. Yes, this is most likely the case. Cheney is still in charge of the group.

Some might call it a rogue government.
And he still has power.

But he is in a giant power struggle with Obama.

Cheney will lose that battle.

[go west young man]

113. Check my post at 111 on the new FPI.

Throw in Ari Fleischer with Dan Senor, Kristol and Kagan add a touch of Freedom Watch and The Republican Jewish Coalition which includes Fleischer, Norm Coleman, David Frum,Ken Mehlman, plus all the below Bush White House connections, add a touch of Vets for Freedom and voila you have the makings of what is the new PNAC. FPI is the new PNAC. The head of the hydra so to speak.

The following members of the Republican Jewish Coalition board of directors are connected with President George W. Bush and the Bush administration.

Wayne L. Berman, Bush Ranger 2000 and Bush Pioneer 2004, member of the Libby Defense Trust Advisory Committee, and husband of Bush White House social secretary Lea Berman.
Matt Brooks, executive director of both the Republican Jewish Coalition and the Jewish Policy Center think tank, "served as the national field director for Victory '88 Jewish Campaign Committee, designing and implementing campaign strategy on behalf of the Bush-Quayle '88 campaign."<4>
Lewis M. Eisenberg, finance chairman of the Republican National Committee, member of the Libby Defense Trust Advisory Committee, former chairman (1995-2001) of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, owner of the World Trade Center.<5>
David M. Flaum, RJC National Chairman, member of the Libby Defense Trust Advisory Committee, and Bush Pioneer 2004.
Richard J. Fox, Freedom's Watch funder, long-term Republican activist, and chairman of the Jewish Policy Center, who served as Pennsylvania state chairman for the Reagan/Bush campaign in 1980 and finance chairman in 1988 of Jack Kemp's presidential campaign.
David Frum, a former special assistant to President George W. Bush for economic speech writing and credited with helping coin the phrase "Axis of Evil", who is now with the American Enterprise Institute.
Sheldon Kamins, former executive committee member of Finance Committee of George W. Bush for president and Libby Defense Trust Advisory Committee.<5>
Ken Mehlman, former chair of the Republican National Committee.
Mel Sembler, Freedom's Watch funder, appointed Ambassador to Italy (2001-2005) by President George W. Bush and Ambassador to Australia and Nauru by President George H.W. Bush.
Ned L. Siegel, who was involved in the 2000 Florida recount and a Bush Pioneer 2000 and Bush Ranger 2004.
Walter P. Stern, board chairman of the Hudson Institute.<6><7>
Ronald Weiser, Bush Pioneer 2000 and Ambassador to Slovakia (2001-2004).<8>
Fred Zeidman, a "longtime friend" of President George W. Bush and convicted felon Jack Abramoff's "immediate successor at the lobbying firm of Greenberg Traurig.<9>
No longer listed as directors are:
Sam Fox,<10> the Republican fundraiser from Missouri who was named in an April 2007 recess appointment as Ambassador to Belgium by President George W. Bush. Fox's 2004 funding of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth prevented his Senate confirmation earlier. Fox is also a member of the Libby Defense Trust Advisory Committee.
Howard Leach, Freedom's Watch funder, served as Ambassador to France until 2005, Bush Pioneer, funder to Bush 2000 Florida recount, major donor to Republican candidates, and member of the Libby Defense Trust Advisory Committee.<5>
Kevin Moley, Freedom's Watch funder, served as U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations (2001-2006), as well as a Senior Advisor to Cheney for Bush-Cheney 2000.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Freedom%27s_Watch
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Republican_Jewish_Coalition
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Vets_for_Freedom

[suffragette]

124. And this is magnified by the purposeful purge of career civil servants

and replacement of them by loyalists during the last eight years.
This was done systematically and to a much larger degree than the usual new administration shuffle. Combine that with privatization of the agencies (many with a strong connection to Cheney/Halliburton) and you have an extraordinary number of mid-level positions filled by people with political agendas connected to Cheney. The DOJ purge received most of the attention, but it went on from the FDA to the IRS and on and on.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2101301
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1384079

[Psychic Consortium]

84. What was their ultimate end goal?

What was the diabolical vision they hoped to achieve at the end of the day? A mid east that belonged to them and the corporations they represent?

H20 Man you have hit many nails on the head in one post.

CONGRATULATIONS TO YOU FOR YOUR EXCELLENT WORK.

PC

[Hotler]

86. Kicking this up! Thanks H2O eo.

[pleah]

87. K&R

Bookmarked.

[ChiciB1]

88. So, So SAD... So, So TRUE & So, So, SICK!! Yes, Many Of Us Have

known so much for so long and yet, we STILL WAIT!!!

JUSTICE DENIED!! JUST ICE Instead!

[Muttocracy]

90. bookmarked! nt

[antigop]

91. Thanks for all the info on this thread. n/t

[keepthemhonest]

92. great thread very interesting stuff here

With all of this coming to light I hope justice will come for them.Good must win over evil.

[midnight]

93. NO, it is not to much to ask those who lead this country to

re-instate the rule of law.

[DCKit]

95. A Brazillion words to say "We Were Right."

Seriously though, I recycled all my tin foil years ago when I realized that no matter what I imagined, BushCo* was doing far worse. No matter what happens to them, it won't make up for what they've done. But I wouldn't object to having the lot of them air-dropped (with or without parachutes) into Baghdad. Y'know, "Let God Sort it Out."

Bookmarked for reading when fully rested.

[snappyturtle]

96. K&R Thanks H20 Man....oh my, it all fits! And, "No", it's not too much

to ask for justice to be served.

[glitch]

97. Grand slam, OP and thread. K & R nt

[mzmolly]

99. It is not too much to ask. And all of our elected and appointed officials who were involved, should

face justice.

K and R.

[lonestarnot]

101. ready and waiting! K & R!

[dmr]

103. Cheney's manipulation to shut out the House & Senate Intelligence Cmtes

This article shows Cheney's deception and sabotage. It intertwines with Plame, and how Cheney's actions paved the way for an independent investigation.

The primary reason for posting is how the very powerful Cheney bullied and threatened our U.S. Congressional lawmakers - our advocates - The goal: to render them impotent.

(this article is long)

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0215nj1.htm
Cheney's Call
By Murray Waas, National Journal
© National Journal Group Inc.
Thursday, Feb. 15, 2007

Early on the morning of June 20, 2002, then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham, D-Fla., received a telephone call at home from a highly agitated Dick Cheney. Graham, who was in the middle of shaving, held a razor in one hand as he took the phone in the other.

The vice president got right to the point: A story in his morning newspaper reported that telephone calls intercepted by the National Security Agency on September 10, 2001, apparently warned that Al Qaeda was about to launch a major attack against the United States, possibly the next day. But the intercepts were not translated until September 12, 2001, the story said, the day after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Because someone had leaked the highly classified information from the NSA intercepts, Cheney warned Graham, the Bush administration was considering ending all cooperation with the joint inquiry by the Senate and House Intelligence committees on the government's failure to predict and prevent the September 11 attacks. Classified records would no longer be turned over to the Hill, the vice president threatened, and administration witnesses would not be available for interviews or testimony.

Moreover, Graham recalled in an interview for this story, Cheney warned that unless the leaders of the Intelligence committees took action to discover who leaked the information about the intercepts -- and more importantly, to make sure that such leaks never happened again -- President Bush would directly make the case to the American people that Congress could not be trusted with vital national security secrets.

- snip -

By 7:30 in the morning on that June day in 2002 when Cheney called Graham, the chairmen and ranking members of the Senate and House Intelligence committees met in a secure room in the Capitol. They discussed how to prevent fallout from the administration's threat that they could not be trusted with classified information. Present at the meeting were Graham, Goss, Shelby, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, then the ranking Democrat on the House panel. Senior aides were excluded.

The four lawmakers emerged from their meeting and told their staffs that they had decided to take the unprecedented step of requesting the Justice Department to conduct a criminal inquiry into whether they, any other members of their committees, or their aides were responsible for leaking the NSA intercepts to the media.

A key participant in the events recalled in an interview: "It was a hastily made decision, made out of a sense of panic... and by people with bleary eyes."

Another person involved recalled: "There was a real concern that any meaningful oversight by Congress was very much at stake. The political dynamic back then -- not that long after September 11 -- was completely different. They took Cheney's threats very seriously."

Graham said, "Looking back at it, I think we were clearly set up by Dick Cheney and the White House. They wanted to shut us down. And they wanted to shut down a legitimate congressional inquiry that might raise questions in part about whether their own people had aggressively pursued Al Qaeda in the days prior to the September 11 attacks. The vice president attempted to manipulate the situation, and he attempted to manipulate us." Graham added: "But if his goal was to get us to back off, he was unsuccessful."

Graham said that Goss shared his concerns. In 2003, according to Graham, he speculated to Goss that the White House had set them up in an effort to sabotage the joint September 11 congressional inquiry. Graham says that Goss responded: "I often wondered that myself."

Goss, who would later serve as CIA director under President Bush, declined to comment for this article. Graham, citing a lifelong friendship with Goss, refused to say anything else regarding his private discussions with Goss.

- snip -

At the time of Cheney's phone call in June 2002, Graham and other lawmakers on the Intelligence committees suspected that the vice president viewed the leaking of the NSA intercepts as an opportunity to try to curtail what he believed were nettlesome congressional inquiries.

If that was, indeed, the vice president's main purpose for his angry call to Graham, it was not the first time that Cheney had sought to use a press leak as a pretext for constraining a congressional probe.

A recently declassified memo handwritten by Cheney more than 30 years ago when he was an aide to President Ford shows him considering whether to press the Justice Department to pursue criminal charges against The New York Times and reporter Seymour Hersh after the newspaper published an article revealing a highly classified espionage program against the Soviet Union. The memo was uncovered for a soon-to-be-aired documentary by the PBS program Frontline.

When the Justice Department balked at prosecuting anyone, Cheney adroitly tried to exploit the news report for other ends. He wrote under the heading "Broader ramifications": "Can we take advantage of it to bolster our position on the Church committee investigation? To point out the need for limits on the scope of the investigation?"

At the time, a select committee headed by then-Sen. Frank Church, D-Idaho, was investigating the CIA -- an unprecedented and historic inquiry that revealed everything from CIA-sponsored coups against foreign governments to attempted assassinations of foreign leaders, to illegal domestic spying.

- More at link -

[mmonk]

104. Widespread corruption keeps the lid on the truth

and our republic from functioning as intended. What surprise me is how many people across this country have bought into everything hook, line, and sinker without question or interest. It is what haunts me on a daily basis. It shows an amazing and appalling lack of intellectual depth in my countrymen and women. I remember studying Nazi Germany intently as a youngster, not only because my father fought them, but in my wondering how people could let such a lack of conscience and insight emerge within their society. Now, I'm sure it can happen anywhere and can no matter how airtight you think your system of government is or how grounded its moral compass might be in your mind.

[Norquist Nemesis]

105. Gotta ask this HUGE question: How was it that Cheney was picked

to become the main guy to vet Bush's VP choice? Yeah, I know he ended up recommending himself, but has there ever been anything about how it came about that Cheney was the best choice for the responsibility of picking in the first place? The stars seem to have all come together on this, somehow.

The strange thing is that at the heart of everything in the OP, Cheney is the common link to absolutely everything.

[go west young man]

110. I think your putting the cart before the horse probably.

It was Cheney and the Neocons who chose Bush to be the bumbling idiot that allows them to implement and get away with it all. Oliver Stone alludes to this in "W".

[dmr]

106. Lincoln Chaffe's version of how Cheney's 'Shadow Gov't' began:

Recently someone here on DU told me they found it hard to believe that Cheney was busting balls even before he took the Jan. 20, 2001 oath. This helps to put perspective to your statement that Bush* was the front-man.

Posted by proud2BlibKansan on April 21, 2008:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3188769

Books
Excerpt: 'Against the Tide'

by Lincoln Chafee

'Against the Tide' cover

NPR.org, April 16, 2008 · Early in December 2000, Senator Specter asked Richard Cheney, our Republican vice presidential candidate, to have lunch with us on Wednesday, December 13. The vote-counting fiasco in Florida was under way and no one knew whether Texas Governor George W. Bush or Vice President Al Gore had been elected the nation's 43rd president. Then, the night before we were to meet with Mr. Cheney, the news broke: the U.S. Supreme Court had declared the Florida recount unconstitutional. The Court authorized Katharine Harris, Florida's Republican secretary of state, to declare Bush and Cheney victorious.

We Republicans had won the presidency by a single vote in the Electoral College and a single vote in the Supreme Court. In the executive branch, winning by a whisker is as good as winning in a landslide, but not so in the Senate. For the first time in a century we had a Senate split down the middle, 50-50, with a Republican vice president available to break a tie in our favor. That whisker-thin margin of victory had real consequences to my way of thinking.

It meant that our small club of five moderate Republican votes would be vital to President-elect Bush if he had any hope of getting his legislative initiatives through.

That was why Vice President-elect Richard Cheney came to our lunch that day: Not to say he needed us, but to tell us that he and George W. Bush were in charge and no one else.

In steady, quiet tones, the Vice President-elect laid out a shockingly divisive political agenda for the new Bush administration, glossing over nearly every pledge the Republican ticket had made to the American voter. President-elect Bush had promised that healing, but now we moderate Republicans were hearing Richard Cheney articulate the real agenda: A clashist approach on every issue, big and small, and any attempt at consensus would be a sign of weakness. We would seek confrontation on every front. He said nothing about education or the environment or health care; it was all about these new issues that were rarely, if ever, touted in the campaign. The new administration would divide Americans into red and blue, and divide nations into those who stand with us or against us. I knew that what the Vice President-elect was saying would rip the closely divided Congress apart. We moderates had often voted with President Clinton on things that powerful Republican constituencies didn't like: an increase in the minimum wage, a patients' bill of rights, and campaign finance reform. Mr. Cheney knew this, but he ticked off the issues at the top of his agenda and did it fearlessly. It made no difference to him that we were potential adversaries; he was going down his to-do list and checking off Confrontation Number 1.

Senator Arlen Specter spoke first. As the most junior member, I would have my say last, if at all. I could hardly sit still as I waited to hear my respected friend wade into this outrageous manifesto.

And then, in a moment I can only describe as infuriating, Senator Specter took no leadership role in representing the moderate point of view. He acquiesced, and others followed his example.

As each of my colleagues spoke in turn, I waited for one of them to push back. Surely one of them would have the presence of mind to say, Whoa! Time out! What are you talking about, Mister Vice President? You weren't elected to scrap international agreements. You never said to the voters: Elect us and we promise to bring back deficit spending and drive the next generation into debt.

But no one resisted. We sat there and listened as Mr. Cheney made divisive pronouncements of policy that would come as a complete surprise to many of the Americans who had voted to elect the Bush/Cheney ticket. I stopped waiting for someone to challenge Mr. Cheney when I saw my Republican friends around the table nodding in agreement as he held forth.

I was at a loss to explain my colleagues' compliant behavior then. I remain so now. It may have been an all-too-human response to the circumstances of the time. Anxious weeks of uncertainty were finally over. Now we knew the outcome of the election. The bitterness of the Florida recount was behind us. My colleagues seemed happy and relieved just to know who was in charge. And they seemed a little awestruck. This is the Vice President of the United States.

The contentious and destructive agenda that Mr. Cheney dropped on us was troubling enough, but what really unnerved me was his attitude. He welcomed conflict. We Republicans had promised America exactly the opposite. In the presidential debates, moderator Jim Lehrer asked Governor Bush to describe the foreign policy he would adopt, if elected. Candidate Bush said he would be humble in foreign affairs; that if we were arrogant, other countries would resent us. Now his running mate was telling us the new administration would make a point of being arrogant and divisive. Mr. Cheney was brazen in his pronouncements. A humble foreign policy? His attitude was anything but humble. He said that the campaign was over and that our actions in office would not be dictated by what had to be said in the campaign. And he pronounced this deception with no emotion or window dressing of any kind. He was fearless, matter of fact, and smug.

I wondered, where does Cheney get the confidence to say these things a few hours after the Court established him as our Vice President-elect? Where did he get the authority to make this radical departure from the President-elect's own campaign rhetoric?

I had supported Governor George W. Bush over Senator John McCain in the 2000 Rhode Island presidential primary. I met the Texas Governor for the first time in 1999, when he came to Rhode Island to raise money. I contributed and sincerely applauded his remarks to supporters at the Providence Convention Center. He had good campaign patter, and I was impressed. He said all the right things. I thought he could win on his pledge to bring a new, unifying atmosphere to Washington, and that he might even be as good and decent a president as his father had been. He seemed moderate enough to win support from all sides, and he had the Bush name. After the bitter partisan atmosphere of the Clinton impeachment, voters looked back with affection at the governor's father.

I liked that the governor had worked cooperatively with Democrats in the Texas Legislature. If leaders in both parties could rally around him, he was just what the country needed. America stood at the summit of power, emerging from the Cold War as an economic, cultural and military force without equal. We had wasted valuable years in partisan bickering, but our moment in history was still at hand. What a tremendous opportunity and responsibility to do good things in the world.

Then came that devastating first day after George W. Bush and Richard Cheney prevailed in the Supreme Court. If we were to believe Mr. Cheney, the President-elect would not only reignite the partisanship of the Clinton-Gingrich era but would make it even more toxic. Mr. Cheney tore our best campaign promises to shreds and the moderates acquiesced instead of pelting him with outrage. It was clear to me then that there would be no key bloc of moderate votes helping to shape legislation and reunite America over the next four years. In any event, Cheney was not asking for support – he was ordering us to provide it. The President-elect had his agenda; we were just along for the ride.

My heart sank as my colleagues peeled away, one by one. It was the most demoralizing moment of my seven-year tenure in the Senate.

When it was my turn to speak, I made the case that our five votes would be crucially important in a 50-50 Senate. I chose my words carefully, and probably stammered with the effort to contain my fury. We were on the cusp of a new millennium that held enormous promise for American leadership in the world, and what I had just heard was petty, arrogant and irresponsible. It threatened to lead in exactly the wrong direction.

I spoke in the perhaps too-optimistic hope that I might yet rally the moderates to seriously apprehend the implications of the new agenda. When I told Mr. Cheney, "Our votes at this table are important," he could hardly be bothered. He gave me the back of his hand with a truism: "Every vote is important."

There was no support to be had, and lunch was over.

Excerpted from Against the Tide: How a Compliant Congress Empowered a Reckless President, by Lincoln Chafee, with permission from Thomas Dunne Books. Copyright (c) 2008 by Lincoln Chafee. All rights reserved.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89...
(NPR link no longer works)

[Nothing Without Hope]

107. No, that's NOT too much to ask. Thanks for this clear analysis, H2O Man n/t

[global1]

108. The Last Couple Of Days The Torture Scandal Has Dominated The News.......

it looks like BushCo is imploding around it with Cheney looking like the kingpin. So all of a sudden we're calling for independent investigations, special panels to investigate, etc - and it looks like we're going down that path.

But something sticks in my mind and it was a Q/A between George W. and a reporter. Bush was asked - What's your definition of torture? and Bush's response was - "whatever the law says it is". On the surface it looks like a flippant & arrogant answer - yet - Bush knew that the law was modified to take into account whatever BushCo ordered - to give them cover - it really becomes a brilliant answer.

I know you said in your post and I fully believe this:

"It is important to remember that no presidential scandal ever happens in a vacuum. Every scandal is actually part of a larger, multi-dimension series of inter-related illegal activities. This was true in Watergate, and in the Iran-Contra scandals. The neocon/AIPAC espionage scandal is closely related to – and indeed, overlapping with – the Plame scandal; the Niger forgeries scandal; the torture scandal; the domestic spying scandal; and the scandalous lies that brought this nation to war in Iraq. By no coincidence, all six of these dimensions of illegal activities took place within a specific context: they are all the results of VP Dick Cheney’s having "suspended" Constitutional rule on 9/11, and installing the "shadow government"......"

But what if they're throwing us a crumb with this 'torture' thing? Knowing full well that it will go down the path of investigations and hearings - but they know that the outcome will be - "whatever the law says it is" and they functioned within this law that they modified to give them cover.

They walk away - with some mud on their face - but no real prosecutions. We may well be pacified with the fact that it went as far as it did - investigations, hearings, etc. You know we gave it the old college try - but - now it makes it harder to go down the path of the other five 'inter-related illegal activities' - because it will be said that we wasted enough time and money on this 'torture' thing and it didn't go anywhere. We don't need any more witch hunts. This is just political. It's payback for Clinton's impeachment. etc, etc, etc. All of a sudden - the Dems back off any additional investigations - because we're getting close to the 2010 elections or worse yet if this drags on the 2012 elections.

I guess I just don't trust anything or anybody - anymore. I kind of wonder how anyone in Washington D.C. can trust anything or anybody - anymore given some of the other chilling replies to your original message. Given some of the replies - friends could turn on friends.

In a sense - are we being led down this 'torture' path because it is the one that could incense most people - but when it runs its course and doesn't result in any major consequences - we become pacified & bored or frightened we will lose the WH or one or both houses if we continue pushing - so don't want to or just don't pursue the other paths?

This is just a thought I had before I'm off to sleep - if I could sleep now after reading this thread.

I too believe what PNAC wrote about 'a new Pearl Harbor'. Who's knows where this could lead - if we were able to probe all six dimensions. If you catch my drift.

I recently ran across a website and a program called Muckety. Here's the link: http://news.muckety.com/make-a-muckety. I don't have the time or patience - but someone that does might want to check out this program and try to develop a muckety that explores the six dimensions that you speak of in your original post. It might be very telling and help to connect the dots.

Also - I remember just after 9/11 a website cropped up where someone put a comprehensive timeline together of everything that led up to 9/11 - that day - and beyond. I haven't seen anyone refer to that site lately and I don't know if it has been kept up to include all 8 years of BushCo and if it includes this torture scandal, the Plame outing, etc. I lost my bookmark of it and would appreciate it if someone knows that it still exists - to provide a link to it.

[KoKo]

136. your PM box is not activated...

or I would send you a link to what you asked for re the Timeline, privately but here it is.

http://www.amazon.com/Terror-Timeline-Comprehensive-Chronicle-11/dp/0060783389

BTW: I just discovered "Mukety" site a few weeks ago. It's an incredible resource.

:hi:

[global1]

143. Thanks For Your Response - It Helped Me Find The Following Link .....

with respect to the 'terror timeline' and 'torture'.

Here it is:
http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=torture,_rendition,_and_other_abuses_against_captives_in_iraq,_afghanistan,_and_elsewhere

This was what I was looking for.

[omega minimo]

109. Yes, if it ain't your Table.

"But true justice demands that the cards are laid out upon the table, and people accept the consequences for their actions.

"Is that too much to ask?"

[go west young man]

111. Another dimension to the scandal is Azerbaijan and the war in Georgia.

www.nogw.com/download2/%5E8_az_leadership.pdf
http://morris108.wordpress.com/2008/08/18/leadership-of-us-aberbaijan-chamber-of-commerce-map-of-major-eurasian-oil-pipelines/


The neocons are all over the oil rich nation and have established their own US Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce. Cheney is listed as a member of the Advisory Council as are numerous neocons. Names like Dick Armitage, Henry Kissenger, Brent Scowcroft, Richard Perle, Sam Brownback,John Sununu, and James Baker III all pop up. The downside for dems is that Zbigniew Brzezinskiz also has a hand in and he has recently been an adviser for President Obama. Underneath all this is the entire U.S. Foreign Policy in The Middle East. Putin has trumped the U.S. in the Georgian conflict which is all part of the larger "Great Game." The pipeline would only supply roughly 5% of Europe's oil needs anyway so it's not seen as important as initially thought. But many heads would roll on both sides of the aisle and U.S. deceptive Mid-East policy would definitely fully unravel in the public eye if whats going on in the media today continues to roll downhill. Harman, Cheney, AIPAC, are all tied into the same Octopus as you say and Sibel Edmonds case is the big key that can unravel the whole thing. A complete hand wringing would take a lot of courage on the part of the American people. I don't know if they have the stomach for it. Especially with so many dems tied up in it too.The BTC pipeline runs through Georgia to Turkey and most likely the whole thing is also tied into Sibel Edmonds and the Turkey espionage angle. The downside is that the pipeline was authorized under Clinton.
US oil pipeline politics and the Russia-Georgia conflict
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/aug2008/pipe-a21.shtml

Excerpt-In the mid-1990s, the administration of US President Bill Clinton settled on two main pipeline projects to export Caspian oil and gas while bypassing the territories of Russia, Iran and China. The first was a plan to export Turkmen gas through Afghanistan and Pakistan to ports on the Indian Ocean—a plan that led Washington to support the Taliban in 1995-6 in an attempt to unify and pacify Afghanistan so that the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) pipeline could be built. The plan ultimately foundered on the Taliban’s inability to conquer northern Afghanistan.

The other plan was to build a pipeline westward through small, pro-US states in the Caucasus—Georgia and Azerbaijan. Together with an undersea trans-Caspian pipeline connecting Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan on the Caspian’s eastern shore with Azerbaijan on the western shore, the Baku (Azerbaijan)-Tbilisi (Georgia)-Ceyhan (Turkey) pipeline would send a substantial fraction of Caspian energy exports to the Mediterranean. This pipeline was conceived of as a major blow, in particular, to Russia’s longstanding domination of energy routes from the Caspian to the West.






I would also like to point out this gem from Antiwar.com dated March 26,2009 in regards to Bill Kristols new FPI (Foreign Policy Initiative).

Neocons Launch New Foreign Policy Group
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/lubanlobe.php?articleid=14463
It's essentially his new PNAC. If one reads down about halfway they'll see this gem definitely tied into whats going on these days.

"Other speakers will include AEI fellow Frederick Kagan, Robert's brother and one of the key proponents of the "surge" strategy in Iraq, counterinsurgency expert Lt. Col. John Nagl, the new director of Center for a New American Security, and hawkish Democratic Representative Jane Harman."

Rep Harman is the only Dem speaker at Mr. Kristols new FPI. Which is just odd in itself considering whats going on with her lately.

The new FPI also includes Dan Senor former assistant to Paul Bremer in Iraq, notably married to CNN's Campbell Brown and these gems from Sourcewatch.

In 1993 Senor did an internship<9> at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a powerful pro-Israel lobby organization which some regard as being affiliated to the Likud party. AIPAC's website quotes him as saying: "Whether I was learning the ins and outs of Washington with my fellow interns or attending briefings on Capitol Hill, my internship at AIPAC prepared me for my work in politics". His sister, Wendy Senor Singer, heads AIPAC's office in Jerusalem. His brother-in-law, Saul Singer, is the very right-wing opinion editor of the Jerusalem Post.
Senor is listed as a director<10> on the website of USIBEX, the US-Israel Business Exchange. It describes him as a Senior Associate of the Carlyle Group. It is not clear from the website if this information is still current. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Dan_Senor

So to sum it all up. FPI has a new initiative with AIPAC member Dan Senor on board at which Jane Harman is a guest speaker at the same time she is tied up in an AIPAC scandal. AIPAC has some deep tentacles.

[mmonk]

115. thanks.

When I've first tried to explain to people the geopolitical domination and the pipeline to people, they look at me like I'm from outer space. Thanks for the additional info on Foreign Policy Iniative running under the radar.

[H2O Man]

118. Yep.

It's a significant piece of the puzzle. But it is one that far too many Americans are unfamiliar with.

[mmonk]

119. Unfortunately. The press here is way too inadequate

though it improved in 2008 to 36th (after being much worse the last several years) as far in measures to a free press in worldwide comparison.

http://open.salon.com/blog/je_robertson/2008/10/24/us_ranks_36th_for_press_freedom_worldwide

[go west young man]

132. Another place where the almost forgotten tentacles reach are to

the role played by Marc Grossman. Sibel Edmonds ties him to the AIPAC scandal and selling nuclear secrets. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3216737.ece
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3216737.ece

But what many people don't realize is that he was at a certain meeting on September 11th,2001. http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD08Aa01.html

On September 10, the Pakistani daily, "The News" reported that the Mahmoud visit to the United States "triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council". If he'd been to the National Security Council, he had certainly met Rice. Mahmoud did meet with his counterpart, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director George Tenet. Tenet and Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage had been in Islamabad in May, when Tenet had "unusually long" meetings with Musharraf. Armitage for his part has countless friends in the Pakistani military and the ISI. Mahmoud also met a number of high officials at the White House and the Pentagon and had a crucial meeting with Marc Grossman, the under secretary of state for political affairs. Rice maintains she did not meet Mahmoud then.

Incidentally his wiki page is so clean sounding considering his role in all of this it's ridiculous. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Isaiah_Grossman

Note that Porter Goss was also there at the meeting on September 11th. Goss who had all this to say about investigating the Plame scandal. "Rep. Porter Goss said August 5, 2004, that the uproar over allegations that White House officials purposely identified a covert CIA agent appears largely political and doesn't yet merit an investigation by the House Select Committee on Intelligence, which he chairs. ...

"'I would say there's a much larger dose of partisan politics going on right now than there is worry about national security,' said Goss, R-Sanibel. 'But I would never take lightly a serious allegation backed up by evidence that there was a willful -- and I emphasize willful, inadvertent is something else -- willful disclosure, and I haven't seen any evidence.'

"Goss said he would act if he did have evidence of that sort.

"'Somebody sends me a blue dress and some DNA, I'll have an investigation,' Goss said."

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Porter_Goss

Goss who incidentally helped cover up Saudi Arabias role in Sept 11th. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-09-07-graham-charges_x.htm

I digress however, back to Grossman. This article from Antiwar.com is a must read for the proper scope of AIPAC.
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=11856

The AIPAC scandal with Harman could expose some of these underlying connections.

Finally I also wanted to add this link to the Republican Jewish Coalition. http://elitewatch.911review.org/RJC.html Scroll down to Lewis M. Eisenberg and you find this trinket.

For many years, Mr. Eisenberg was a partner of Goldman Sachs & Co. In 1990, he founded Granite Capital International Group, an investment management company headquartered in New York City. Mr. Eisenberg also served from 1995 to 2001 as Chairman of the Board of Commissioners of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. The Port Authority is also, of course, the owner of the World Trade Center, and Mr. Eisenberg led the agency through the first three months of recovery and clean-up after the terrorist attacks of September 11. He was recently named a member of New York?s Lower Manhattan Redevelopment Authority, which will spearhead the rebuilding of Ground Zero.

Man the tentacles run deep. Looks like he came out all right from september 11th.

[robertpaulsen]

144. Grossman is also connected to the Plame/Brewster Jennings & Associates blown cover.

One man described as a pillar of the ATC that Edmonds has been able to talk about is Marc Grossman. http://sibeledmonds.blogspot.com/2006/09/doug-feith-richard-perle-and-marc.html The same Marc Grossman who told Scooter Libby on June 11 or 12, 2003, more than a month before Novak’s column, about Wilson’s wife working at the CIA. http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001046.php The same Marc Grossman mentioned in the 1st edition of American Judas who had a meeting that was reported on September 10, 2001, as “most important” with General Mahmoud Ahmad, who resigned from being Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Chief the following month in the wake of an investigation by Times of India, confirmed by the FBI, that he authorized ISI agent Omar Saeed Sheikh to wire transfer $100,000 in August 2001 to Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker of the 9/11 attacks. http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline/main/essaysaeed.html When questioned in April 2006 by director Mathieu Verboud for an interview that was later cut out of a documentary about Sibel Edmonds titled Kill the Messenger, Grossman claimed he didn’t know anything about Sibel Edmonds or Valerie Plame. This cannot be true, according to Edmonds, because Grossman was one of three officials – the other two, she says, are Richard Perle and Douglas Feith – who had been watched by both Valerie Plame's Brewster Jennings & Associates CIA team, and by the major FBI investigation of organized crime and governmental corruption on which she herself was working until being terminated in April 2002. http://sibeledmonds.blogspot.com/2006/09/doug-feith-richard-perle-and-marc.html

http://americanjudas.blogspot.com/2007/03/american-judas-2nd-edition-investigate.html

[robertpaulsen]

137. Great find, go west young man! I knew about AACC, but not FPI.

Upthread, I was musing about Dick Cheney and why this sudden spotlight hogging on MSM when he spent the past eight years holed up in an undisclosed bunker. The optimist in me is hoping that this is just desperation, that Holder is making behind-the-scenes deals with his former underlings so they can testify against Dick and nail him in court. The pessimist sees a demagogue emboldened by the fact that his moles in the government remain unscathed in spite of Hersh's attempts to expose them.

So if the pessimist is right, I want to know, how many people that are part of FPI are still working for our government? If you want to find Cheney's moles, that seems like a likely place to look!

[go west young man]

154. I would think your right but ferreting them out seems quite difficult

at this stage as Cheney probably has had them deeply entrenched for years. Obama surely knows this and hopefully he has some other card up his sleeve to bring the whole octopus to the surface. The beauty of being in charge is that he can slowly release info and help the public put it all together. Death by a thousand cuts from their own actions. The downside of course is many dems will probably be implicated too. Harman definitely is heavily wrapped up in this stuff. And I've always thought Joe Lieberman's real agenda was "Israel at any cost". That's what he serves in congress for. For Israel. And with Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff I'm doubtful Obama wants to go too deep to get the Octopus up out of the water.

[zeemike]

112. K&R a must read....n/t

[H2O Man]

114. Wow!

I had planned to spend a quiet day at my pond, enjoying the sun. But it looks like I've got to put some time into responding to some of the outstanding posts here.

I really appreciate the interest to the OP/thread. This is what DU can be like, when we put our minds together.

Thank you.

[Soylent Brice]

116. no, it is not too much to ask. full exposure is the

only way to prevent something of this magnitude from happening again.

K&R

[HamdenRice]

117. Excellent! A must read K&R

[mod mom]

120. Just like the US Atty Scandal & Siegelman are related to ELECTION FRAUD. Those scandals, too

have Dems who are not willing to get involved. Exposing all will be best for the whole country!

Thank you H2o Man, I always appreciate you well thought out posts! rec'd

[brindis_desala]

121. This is a remarkably concise description of

what the country is up against and why, his relative inexperience and "lack of connections" makes President Obama necessarily cautious, it also makes him especially suited to disinfect the mess in that he has not been around long enough to be tainted. However it will take skill, patience and enormous courage to tackle the virus. One hopes there are enough honorable public servants who were willing to quietly bide their time and risk the fickle lash of history for the sake of the nation.

[Bluenorthwest]

122. It is not too much to ask.

Great thread indeed.

[Atman]

123. Best read on DU in quite a while. Thanks H2O Man!

:thumbsup:

.

[Nothing Without Hope]

125. a kick for this clear, concise analysis n/t

[PRETZEL]

126. Best thread in a long while,

thanks H2O man for the OP as well as all the DU experts weighing in.

The confluence of the many scandals, shady associations in one thread is the makings of a good book.

If I may indulge the experts and allow myself the opportunity to add my .02 cents on just a surface of the topics.

The underlying reasons why Dick Cheney annointed himself as most qualified for Vice President is an interesting question. I thought Bart Gellman did as best he could in understanding the process, but IMO, didn't go back to the root. The question as to why it was Dick Cheney who was chosen to lead the VP vetting process may be a better question. Did Cheney lobby for this? Was this a decision GHWB forced upon the RNC given Junior was the presumptive nominee? One thing we do know from past history is the relatively close relationship Cheney had with Bush Sr. I also learned through Gellman the attention to detail that borders on the obsessive that Cheney has and apparently is widely known for. This leads me to believe that GHWB did indeed push for Cheney leading the vetting process. What I did not know and learned through Gellman just how much of an opportunistic ideologue Dick Cheney actually is. I've read in the past many of the PNAC white papers and was aware that Cheney was indeed part of that orgainzation as were many of the other players that ultimately became the key players.

Cheney's reign at Halliburton may connect some of the dots as to Iraq. First and foremost Cheney would be very aware of the Peak Oil concepts especially as they relate to the Middle East. Oil extraction and equipment services were their mainstay and the biggest area of expertise. He would also be expertly aware of both US consumption vs. domestic/foreign supplies. He would have known, to a great degree, what the untapped reserves were in countries like Saudia Arabia, Iran and Iraq. He would also be keenly aware of discussions and actual switching of petrodollars from the US dollar to the Euro. As we have seen over the past few years the effect that has had on the dollar vs. the Euro. If this backround has merit and apply it to Kevin Phillips' views in (I believe) American Theocracy we may gain an understanding as to why Iraq was the ultimate target. His view based upon an understanding of historical "empires" show that their decline was in a major part due to their inability to maintain the resources needed to sustain their economies. I don't think it much of a stretch to say that our economy is oil based. We use well over a quarter of the oil produced in the world despite limited reserves and domestic production. It's also not a big stretch that the best way to control the resources is to control them militarily.

One thing I learned, especially through Bart Gellman, was just how differently Bush and Cheney saw the Iraq War. Both were strongly in agreement of overthrowing the Iraqi government, but for very different reasons. What I wrote in the paragraph above is why I believe Cheney thoroughly felt the need to invade Iraq. Bush, on the other hand, was by this time fully engulfed in the Apocolyptic views of the fundamentalist Christian Right. I've firmly believe now that that viewpoint was his driving force behind the invasion.

The truest of scandals (and quite possibly the most treasonous) are without a doubt the Plame, Sibel Edmonds and AIPAC scandals. I'm certainly going to defer to those who are so much more educated on these than myself, but it is by no means a large leap of faith connecting them. I say that mainly because they aren't necessarily borne out of ideological or policy positions. I'm not sure I can add anything new.

[nichomachus]

127. One small quibble . . .

There is significant documentation that indicates their plan to overthrow Saddam was considered to be the first step towards reaching the larger goals.

Saddam was totally immaterial. They were going to invade Iraq -- no matter what. If you read the original PNAC documents, their goal was to reshape the middle east, and the world, and to use Iraq as the launching pad. The PNAC document even said that they would do it whether Saddam was there or not.

Now, they used the overthrow of Saddam as their justification -- and Bush has some Oedipal issues to resolve in going after him -- but had Saddam died or fled the country, they would have invented some excuse to go in.

P.S. I don't think we're going to be leaving Iraq in the foreseeable future. So, the PNAC plan is still a go. We may draw down troops a bit, but we aren't going to give up our extensive network of military installations there.

[Beam Me Up]

131. kick

:kick:

[bbgrunt]

133. Thank you all for one of the best and most informative

threads I've read. Yes, it is ALL connected like one of those giant mushroom colonies...

[bridgit]

138. Yup, g.w. bush was the bully puppet; they had to have known how easy it would be...

to slip whatever they'd care to under his nose along with a, "Nice drive Mr. President" a compliment for his battle axe mom, family wealth and a bag of pretzels and he'd sign anything, anything! Reagan was the prototype corporatist tattercoat pol; able to at least provide the imagery of a guy saddling and riding his own horse from out the glow of an American morning on a 60's box of Boraxo till he slipped off it...hm, 60's, 60's.........well, I'm sure the ME wasn't always what it is today

“Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes her laws”

[KoKo]

140. An interesting article re Harman posted by DU'er over in Editorials:

Harman Wiretap Highlights Suspicions
Intel Concerns of Dual Loyalty ‘Rooted Deep in the System’
By Nathan Guttman
Published April 22, 2009, issue of May 01, 2009.

Although no formal explanation was provided from the National Security Agency for eavesdropping on the Harman conversation, it is widely believed that the wiretap was part of the investigation into the AIPAC case.

According to court records, wiretaps and surveillance in the Rosen-Weissman case began as early as 1999. From the indictment, which is now being reviewed by the attorney general’s office, it is clear that attempts to stop the flow of information to pro-Israel activists led to a wide- ranging counterintelligence operation in which Israeli diplomats and pro-Israel lobbyists were being followed and their conversations monitored. These conversations involved senior government officials who had been in touch with the subjects of the investigation. The U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Virginia reviewed transcripts of these wiretaps in lengthy pretrial proceedings, and parts of them are expected to be presented if the case reaches trial.

Stephen Green, a Vermont-based writer who has chronicled the counterintelligence spats between the United States and Israel since the late 1970s, said the mistrust toward Israel stems from agents working on the cases and not from an overall anti-Israel ideology. “This has nothing to do with politics or with Israeli foreign policy. These are people who deal with these issues on a daily basis and become very, very upset,” Green said.
http://forward.com/articles/105045/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=Email+marketing+software&utm_content=70951008&utm_campaign=May+1%2c+2009+_+ttlhth&utm_term=Harman+Wiretap+Highlights+Dual+Loyalty+Suspicions

Green, who, through the Freedom of Information Act, has obtained documents chronicling decades of security investigations of government officials suspected of leaking restricted information to Israel, was questioned by the FBI about his research during the investigation of the Rosen-Weissman case.

Suspicion toward pro-Israel Americans predates the Pollard espionage affair. In 1979, the FBI looked into allegations that Stephen Bryen, then a staff member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, passed on information to Israeli officials. The search for Israeli spies, which at times focused on the notion of an Israeli network led by a master spy code-named “Mega,” intensified after the 1985 arrest of Jonathan Pollard.

The investigation, as it turned out, never ended, and as recently as April 2008 it resurfaced with the arrest of Ben-Ami Kadish, a former army engineer from New Jersey who passed on classified information to the same Israeli handler that was in charge of Pollard. Kadish, now 85, pleaded guilty last December as part of a plea agreement and is awaiting his May sentencing.

[robertpaulsen]

142. Great find, KoKo! The name Stephen Bryen rang some alarm bells in my mind.

I knew I heard that name before on the Plame Threads. I found this:



Stephen D. Bryen is a longtime Washington insider. He is president of the defense contractor Finmeccanica, Inc., which is the U.S. branch of the Italian arms maker that maintains close ties to many Republican Party elites. Bryen is also closely connected to various high-profile neoconservatives like Richard Perle, under whom Bryen served when Perle was President Ronald Reagan's assistant secretary of defense, and has supported the work of a number of hardline pro-Israel groups like the Center for Security Policy (CSP) and the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).

In the mid-1970s, Bryen and a group of other mainly neoconservative figures, including Michael Ledeen, helped establish JINSA as an important Washington-based think tank specializing in fostering close ties between the U.S. and Israeli militaries. Today, JINSA is a central component of a burgeoning group of U.S. think tanks that pursue a Likud Party-line on Mideast peace and lobby to sustain a strategic relationship between the United States and Israel (for more, see John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," Faculty Research Working Paper, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, March 2006).

snip

Some observers have accused Bryen of using his insider connections in Washington to the benefit of Israel. In his book The Armageddon Network, Michael Saba, a former director of an Arab-American organization, alleged that in 1978 he saw Bryen, then a staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, offer "Pentagon documents on the bases" to officials of the Israeli government during a meeting in a restaurant in Washington. Writes Saba: "After I reported this incident to the Justice Department, FBI and Justice Department investigators gathered sufficient evidence on Dr. Bryen's activities to recommend he be brought before an investigative grand jury for espionage. The case was quietly closed, however, by Philip Heymann, the assistant attorney general in charge of the Justice Department's Criminal Division, a close personal friend and associate of Dr. Bryen's attorney. Bryen was never formally charged or made to account for his actions under oath" (from Michael Saba, "Pollard in Perspective," Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, July 14, 1986).

More recently, Finmeccanica was at the center of a corruption scandal surrounding former Rep. Curt Weldon (R-PA), who was voted out of office in the 2006 mid-term elections. Weldon's daughter Kim was offered a job at a Finmeccanica subsidiary shortly after the contractor won a $1.6 billion contract to build a fleet of Marine One helicopters. Some saw the deal, which came as a surprise to many observers, as part of a quid-pro-quo resulting from Italy's support for the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq (Jeffrey Klein and Paolo Pontoniere, "Weldon Case Recalls Ike's Warning: Corrupting Power of Military-Industrial Complex," New America Media, October 31, 2006). In 2003, Shoshana Bryen, who continues to serve as a JINSA director, donated money as a representative for Finmeccanica to Weldon's election campaign ("Contributions from Individuals—'04," Congressional Quarterly's PoliticalMoneyLine, undated).

snip

Even prior to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Bryen was part of a core group of foreign policy hardliners and neoconservatives who pushed for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. In February 1998, for example, he joined the likes of Richard Perle, Richard Allen, Frank Gaffney, Douglas Feith, Robert Kagan, Paul Wolfowitz, and David Wurmser in signing his name to an "open letter" to President Bill Clinton produced by the Committee for Peace and Security in the Gulf that advocated overthrowing Saddam Hussein. The letter, part of a broad neoconservative campaign that championed a new post-Cold War U.S. foreign policy aimed at overturning rogue regimes and aggressively pushing democracy, argued that "containment" of Iraq was not viable because of its purported weapons of mass destruction programs. "Only a determined program to change the regime in Baghdad will bring the Iraqi crisis to a satisfactory conclusion," the letter said.

http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1063.html

[KoKo]

152. I gotta go and check out...

"Mega" but for some reason I think DU researchers have already figured that one out.

For Summer Reading...back to Ludlum?

But...yeah, more needs to be done on Bryen...unless he's been done before.

[BelgianMadCow]

145. The office of special plans!

that gave me a flashback allright.

Stovepiping cherrypicked "intelligence" via a bunch of partisan Cheneyites, without any oversight whatsoever.

Now that's a place that could use some Serious Scrutiny - even though I feel the questioning of the war's legality is no longer on the front burner (who tallies the Iraqi victims anymore?).

[McCamy Taylor]

146. Great thread!

[Raksha]

147. There is also the election fraud scandal, for a grand total of seven,

maybe eight if you consider the 2000 and 2004 elections separately. That's what made the others possible, after all. Too late to recommend, but kicking anyway.

[BeFree]

153. Eight works

And like you say, it all hinges on the stolen elections. Good reminder, thanks.

[go west young man]

155. Eight would make it officially an Octopus.