Home The Website    Corruption Updates    The Database    The Archives    Link Clusters    Why    How to Help     Contact
Fight Corporate Media Liars


Posted: December 9, 2007, Draft edition

Previous Page: Page 135         All Archives               Next page: Page 137

Contact Us: Committeefordemocracy.org

1) The Articles linked below were Abstracted from the sources cited. After the abstract there's analysis and commentary, links to related articles, and a link to the database with suggested search terms.

CIA destroyed video of 'waterboarding' al-Qaida detainees



Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington

Friday December 7, 2007

The Guardian




The CIA destroyed video evidence of the coercive interrogation of al-Qaida operatives held under its secret rendition programme in order to shield agents from prosecution, it was revealed yesterday.

The decision to destroy two videotapes documenting the use of waterboarding against Abu Zubaydah and another high-value al-Qaida detainee was made in November 2005 - as American media were just beginning to focus on the existence of the secret CIA prison network.

"The tapes posed a serious security risk," the CIA's director, Michael Hayden, told agency employees in a statement yesterday. "Were they ever to leak, they would permit identification of your CIA colleagues who had served in the programme, exposing them and their families to retaliation from al-Qaida and its sympathisers."

. But far more seriously for the Bush administration, it raises the prospect that the CIA withheld information from and obstructed the work of the commission investigating the September 11 attacks as well as lawyers for Zacarias Moussaoui, the so-called 11th hijacker. Officials from the September 11 commission told the New York Times yesterday they had formally requested from the CIA evidence of interrogations, and had been informed that all materials had been handed over.

The Washington Post, which also carried a story on its website yesterday about the destroyed videotapes, reported that the order to destroy the tapes came from Jose Rodriguez Jr, then the director of the CIA's clandestine operations.

The leaders of the house and Senate intelligence committees - which were then under Republican control - were aware of the existence of the footage and the CIA's decision to destroy the material, Hayden said in his memo. However, Democratic committee members who had long demanded that such interrogations be videotaped, were not made aware of the existence of the tapes, the Times reported.

Hayden said the interrogations were filmed in 2002 after George Bush authorised the use of harsh interrogation, including the controversial practice of controlled drowning, known as waterboarding, against al-Qaida suspects.

"The agency was determined that it proceed in accord with established legal and policy guidelines," Hayden wrote. "So, on its own, CIA began to videotape interrogations."

However, the CIA soon discontinued the practice, and it is believed that only two detainees were filmed while undergoing interrogation. It has long been believed that Abu Zubaydah, a Saudi believed to be a close associated of Osama bin Laden, was subjected to harsh treatment following his capture in Pakistan in March 2002.

The footage would have clarified what practices such as waterboarding and sleep deprivation - both of which a gravely wounded Abu Zubaydah was subjected to - involve.


CIA says interrogation tapes were destroyed

Critics complain that the destroyed videos most likely contained evidence of employing methods of torture.

By Greg Miller

Los Angeles Times Staff Writer


December 7, 2007




WASHINGTON — The CIA said Thursday that it had destroyed videotapes of its secret interrogations of terrorism suspects, taking the action at a time when the agency's harsh methods were coming under intense congressional and legal scrutiny.

But the disclosure is likely to rekindle the controversy surrounding the CIA's use of so-called "enhanced" interrogation methods -- which included subjecting detainees to temperature extremes and sleep deprivation, as well as the widely condemned practice of simulated drowning commonly known as waterboarding.

Hayden's revelation came as key members of congressional oversight committees approved a spending bill that would bar the CIA and other agencies from using any harsh interrogation methods and force intelligence agencies to abide by strict rules adopted by the U.S. Army last year.

"The destruction of these tapes suggests an utter disregard for the rule of law," said Jameel Jaffer, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's National Security Project. The group has mounted challenges to the government's legal basis for employing harsh interrogation methods. "It was plainly a deliberate attempt to destroy evidence that could have been used to hold CIA agents accountable for the torture of prisoners."

Hayden said that the CIA's office of general counsel had examined the tapes and "determined that they showed lawful methods of questioning."

He also said that the tapes had been reviewed by the agency's office of the inspector general in 2003, but did not say whether the inspector general rendered any opinion on the methods the tapes showed.

Hayden also said that the existence of the tapes was disclosed to congressional oversight committees "years ago," and that the agency later notified the panels of the tapes' destruction.

However, the current chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said he was never shown the videotapes and was given only limited information about their existence. He said the committee was not told until November 2006 that the tapes had been destroyed the year before.

"Our committee must review the full history and chronology of the tapes, how they were used and the reasons for destroying them, and any communication about them that was provided to the courts and Congress," Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) said.

The CIA abandoned the use of waterboarding and certain other harsh methods as its treatment of detainees became a source of controversy. In July, President Bush signed an executive order meant to bring the CIA's interrogation methods into compliance with the Geneva Convention, which bars the mistreatment of detainees.

On Wednesday, members of the House and Senate intelligence committees reached agreement on a compromise intelligence funding bill. It includes a provision that would force the CIA to follow the Army interrogation field manual.

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

The Same old song and dance: Lies and deceptions of the Corporate Press

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., December, 2007

The reporting by the LA Times is sad. They claim, in the article above, that bush signed a law prohibiting torture. The actual fact is that Bush, after signing the law prohibiting torture, created a signing statement that exempted him from the anti-torture law.

The times goes on to claim that bush signed a law in july that brought the US into compliance with the Geneva Convention. Nothing could be further from the truth. The order bush signed in july authorized the CIA to continue torturing their secretly imprisioned kidnap victims.

The Times did use the term torture once, but mostly relied on the cover phrases, "coercive interrogation," "enchanced interrogation methods," and "harsh interrogation."

This type of reporting well represents the crap the corporate press has been shitting down the throat of America since Vietnam, and even earlier.

Lawmakers Back Limits on Interrogation Tactics


NYT, December 7, 2007



WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 — In a sharp rebuke to White House counterterrorism policy, a Congressional conference committee has voted to outlaw the harsh interrogation techniques used by the Central Intelligence Agency against suspected high-level terrorists.

The vote to require all American interrogators to abide by the Army Field Manual, which prohibits coercive methods, came during negotiations of the Senate and House intelligence committees over the annual intelligence authorization bill. It will not be the last word on the subject; the full House and Senate must still pass the bill, and it would likely face a veto by President Bush.

But passage of the interrogation restriction — by one vote in a tense, three-hour meeting on Wednesday behind closed doors — reflected Congress’s growing disenchantment with the harsh tactics authorized by the White House after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. It was the latest setback for the administration’s insistence that what it calls “enhanced” interrogationtechniques are a critical part of gathering intelligence to thwart future terrorist attacks.

Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, the Democratic chairman of the intelligence committee, said in a statement on Thursday that the existence of a secret, separate interrogation program run by the C.I.A., “however well-intentioned, plays into the hands of our enemies.”

“Our committee has wrestled with this issue for a long time,” Mr. Rockefeller said, “and finally, a majority has agreed that we should no longer have two systems — one for C.I.A. interrogators and one for the military.”

He said questioning prisoners without physical pressure has “been used with success by military and law enforcement interrogators for decades.”

But Senator Christopher S. Bond of Missouri, the Republican vice chairman, in another statement criticized the interrogation amendment as ill advised meddling with a program that protects Americans.

“Because of this last minute amendment, this bill would tie the hands of our terror fighters,” Mr. Bond said.

A White House spokesman, Tony Fratto, denounced the measure and said it would face a presidential veto if it passes.

“The C.I.A. interrogation program has yielded extremely valuable information that has led to the capture of Al Qaeda operatives and the prevention of terrorist attacks,” Mr. Fratto said. “Congress should not be looking for ways to weaken this effective program.”

Since passage of the Detainee Treatment Act in 2005, the military has been restricted by law from using any technique beyond the Army Field Manual, whose 19 approved methods include tactics like “good cop-bad cop,” isolation from other prisoners and “false flag,” in which American interrogators pose as representatives of another country.

Officials also say the C.I.A. long ago dropped some of its harshest methods, including waterboarding, in which water is poured on a prisoner’s face to cause a feeling of suffocation.

But in passing the Military Commissions Act last year, Congress permitted Mr. Bush to authorize additional, tougher techniques beyond those in the Army manual for use by the C.I.A. The president approved such techniques, which remain secret, in an executive order in July.

The C.I.A. director, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, has spoken repeatedly about the training of the interrogators and the relatively few prisoners who have been subjected to the toughest techniques. Intelligence officials have said that of about 100 prisoners held to date in the C.I.A. program, the “enhanced” techniques were used on about 30, and waterboarding used on just three.

Despite the explanations and retrenchments, the United States has had a hard time countering accusations from human rights groups and other countries that it engaged in torture. In May, the Senate intelligence panel came within one vote of blocking funds for the C.I.A. program, which it said damaged the country’s reputation and created obstacles to the prosecution of terrorists.



Whats Really Going on Here:

The emergence of the corporate fascist president

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., December 9, 2007

Congress went through this song and dance earlier, and bush ignored not just long-standing law, but claimed the right to torture in his signing statements and layers of findings that claim the the president has the right to break our constitution, domestic law, the rules of war, and international laws against brutalizing humanity.

The ny times is as mistaken as the la times. Bush has ignored all domestic and international law prohibiting torture.

Bond, a us senator, is quoted above in defence of maintaining torture to prevent "(tying) the hands of our terror fighters". Bond's statement indicates-admits-that there is a force of "terror fighters" in our midst who's hands are obiviously "untied."

We must quickly bind these criminals with handcuffs. And Bond too.

Evidence indicates that the torture chamber is the final destination on the long path of unchecked power, followed by endless confinment in tortourious conditions.

This is a trail begun with political impunity, and pursued using dissappearances, assasination, secret prisons, and finally torture. Bond's logic, as he stated it, was that by ending torture, "the secret interrogation program would play into the hands of terrorists..."

This strange logic requires us to believe that stopping ourselves from committing war crimes would allow the "enemy" to know what to expect: an honorable opponent. At the very least, it would assure us that the real enemy was not our government.

Fratto, a White House spokesman defendes torture as "effective" in the next paragraph. further on, the president shoot par for the course by claiming that his torture program is "secret."

Our laws were the fundamental rules that define who we are, and expresss our values. Instead, our fundamental laws, values and Constitution define who we were, and show us why we must fight Bond, Bush, and the whole group of democrats and republicans who have attached themselves to our body politic like special interest ticks.

The only way we can curb these criminals is to take away the source of their corrupt powers.

These parasitic parties are mutally dependent on the bribery of their corporate and special interest sponsors for their political lives. And they repay them with our blood, treasure, and our rights.

Bond represents the mundane spear-carrier for the criminal power in our govenment that not just protects the torture and international lawlessness of the US government, but also support the claims and use of a whole range of domestic powers prohibited by our style of government, our laws, and our Constiution.

We must force the "leaders" of both parties to get and hold their offices based on the contributions of thier own local voters, not the wealth and power of their corporate sponsors.

As Bond's power depends on corporate wealth and the power of party, he, like the rest of "our" democrat and republican political elite, need to recognize no limits to their misuse of our powers.

The Democraps share the same corrupt basis of political power with the Repugnants, and most dems have voted to pass obnoxious laws supporting Bush's public claims that the president is beyond the law and constitution. Most of the rest have assisted bush through their silence during the current constitutional and civil rights crisis.

The administration's claims to only have tortured a "few" people fails as a defence, first because it is apparent they have frozen, heated, drenched, and hog-tied many hundreds of individuals held on no more than suspicion. Second, this administration and its minions are liars, and their word cannot be trusted.

Our "free press" is little better. I trust the ny times to speak for the corporate government and corporate press, when they are not directly mouthing the words of the administration.

Note how the NY Times only used the word torture twice, first qualified in a quoted source, and finally, torture was used to describe charges made against the US.

The times would not charge our government with torture, despite the overwhelming proof. The time's word choices included "harsh interrogation techniques," "harshest methods," "harsh tactics," "tougher tatics," "tougher techniques," “enhanced” interrogation techniques," and "physical pressure," but they never themselves used the word torture to describe torture.

Calling American war crimes crimes would be a violation of the secret code of the corporate media lapdog.


Bush Does Not Recall Learning of Destroyed CIA Tapes

Senate's Second-Ranking Democrat Calls for Justice Dept. Probe


By William Branigin, Dan Eggen and Joby Warrick

Washington Post Staff Writers

Friday, December 7, 2007; 3:14 PM



The White House said that President Bush was unaware of the tapes or their destruction until this week, but administration sources acknowledged last night that longtime Bush aide Harriet E. Miers knew of the tapes' existence and told CIA officials that she opposed their destruction.

The Senate intelligence committee also announced the start of its own probe into the destroyed videotapes, said Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.).

"We do not know if there was intent to obstruct justice, an attempt to prevent congressional scrutiny, or whether they were simply destroyed out of concern they could be leaked," Rockefeller said. "Whatever the intent, we must get to the bottom of it."


Senator seeks tougher CIA tapes inquiry

By Demetri Sevastopulo in Washington

Financial Times, December 9 2007 19:19


The controversy over the CIA’s destruction of videotapes allegedly showing harsh interrogation of al-Qaeda suspects grew on Sunday with an influential Democrat calling for a special counsel investigation.

A joint investigation by the US justice department and the CIA inspector-general was announced at the weekend. But Joseph Biden, the chairman of the Senate foreign affairs committee and a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, said this would not be sufficiently independent.

Mr Biden questioned the ability of Michael Mukasey, the new attorney-general, to oversee an internal inquiry, given his previous refusal to tell Congress the “waterboarding” – or simulated drowning – interrogation method constituted torture.

“He’s the same guy who couldn’t decide whether waterboarding was torture and he’s going to be doing this investigation,” said Mr Biden. “I think it’s clearer and crisper and everyone will know what the truth [is] . . . if he appoints a special counsel; steps back from it.”

Top of Page


Strange Biden is so against Mukasey when he did not even bother to cast his vote against Mukasey's confirmation

Also See:

Senate Probes CIA Torture Tape Destruction, LAT 12-12

ABC Defends Torture, nightline 12-10


Links to torture news abstracts

essay on mistreatment of torture issue by our media

Links to news abstracts on illegal spying


Search the Corruption Database under


unconstitutional presidential powers


secret prisons

Speak your Mind here! Send your Comments about the Topic Above for Posting!

Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page

2) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Report contradicts Bush on Iran nuclear program

Mon Dec 3, 2007 6:09pm EST

By Matt Spetalnick





WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A new U.S. intelligence report says Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and it remains on hold, contradicting the Bush administration's earlier assertion that Tehran was intent on developing a bomb.

The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) released on Monday could undermine U.S. efforts to convince other world powers to agree on a third package of U.N. sanctions against Iran for defying demands to halt uranium enrichment activities.

Tensions have escalated in recent months as Washington has ratcheted up the rhetoric against Tehran, with U.S. President George W. Bush insisting in October that a nuclear-armed Iran could lead to World War Three.

But in a finding likely to surprise U.S. friends and foes alike, the latest NIE concluded: "We do not know whether (Iran) currently intends to develop nuclear weapons."

That marked a sharp contrast to an intelligence report two years ago that stated Iran was "determined to develop nuclear weapons."

The shift in the intelligence community's thinking on Iran comes five years after a flawed NIE concluded neighboring Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction -- a report that helped pave the way for the U.S.-led invasion in March 2003.

No nuclear, chemical or biological weapons were ever found in Iraq and intelligence agencies since have been more cautious about Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, who have repeatedly accused Iran of seeking nuclear weapons, were briefed on the new NIE last Wednesday.

Washington, which insists it wants to solve the Iran problem diplomatically while leaving military options "on the table," is pushing for tougher U.N. sanctions against Tehran but faces resistance from China and Russia.

Administration officials denied the new NIE had exposed a serious intelligence lapse but could not explain how agencies failed to detect for four years that Iran's nuclear weapons program had been halted.

Intelligence officials said the suspension involved design and engineering for a bomb and covert uranium-conversion work.

A key NIE finding was that: "Tehran's decision to halt its nuclear weapons program suggests it is less determined to develop nuclear weapons than we have been judging since 2005."

Still, the report said: "We also assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons."

Bush Calls for Continued Pressure on Iran


By Paula Wolfson

White House

04 December 2007

Global Security





Iran stops accepting U.S. dollars for oil


RIA Novosti




08/12/2007 16:34 TEHRAN, December 8 (RIA Novosti) - Iran has stopped selling its oil for U.S. dollars, the Iranian ISNA news agency said on Saturday, citing the country's oil minister.

"In line with a policy of selling crude oil in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, the sale of our country's oil in U.S. dollars has been completely eliminated," ISNA reported Oil Minister Gholamhossein Nozari as saying.

He also said "the dollar is no longer a reliable currency."

Iran is the world's fourth-largest crude oil producer.

The U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), published on Monday, stated that Tehran had put a stop to weapons production in 2003, although it was continuing to enrich uranium.

U.S. President George W. Bush remained hawkish, despite the report, saying on Tuesday that, "Iran was dangerous, Iran is dangerous and Iran will be dangerous if they have the know how to make a nuclear weapon."

When asked if military action remained an option, the president answered, "The best diplomacy - effective diplomacy - is one in which all options are on the table."


Jalili in Moscow

Iran Times, Dec 4, 2007




IAEA Talks on Dec. 11

TEHRAN, Dec. 3--Secretary of Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili left for Moscow on Monday to discuss strategic issues with senior Russian officials.

Jalili will also review Iran’s peaceful nuclear program, IRNA reported.

On Sunday, Mohammad Ali Hosseini, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman, told reporters that IAEA reports should be the sole basis for objective and non-politicized evaluations.

“Continued cooperation between Iran and the IAEA is important and a new UN resolution or sanctions would have no legal justification,“ he said.

“Any expectations beyond the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty would not be acceptable for Iran.“

The spokesman reiterated Iran’s rejection of the demand for suspending uranium enrichment activities.

EC chairman cautions West against adventurism


Ettela’at, DEC. 3, 2007





TEHRAN - Substitute Friday prayers leader of Tehran Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani here Friday cautioned the West against any adventurism in dealing with Iran over its peaceful nuclear issue.

"If their (the West's) aim in talks (with Iran over its nuclear issue) is adventurism, they should rest assured that their fate in Iran would be worse than that in Afghanistan and Iraq," said Rafsanjani in his second sermon to large groups of worshipers here at Tehran University campus, IRNA reported.

He said Iran's nuclear issue is truly a historical and divulging case. "The issue is an injustice committed against the oppressed revolutionary and Islamic country, Iran, by Western powers."

In Iraq, U.S. shifts its tone on Iran

Officials have backed off the accusations of arms smuggling and agreed to talk. It could be each side needs the other.

By Tina Susman

Los Angeles Times, December 1, 2007




BAGHDAD — Not long ago, U.S. military officials in Iraq routinely displayed rockets, mortars and jagged chunks of metal to reporters and insisted that they were Iranian-made arms being fired at American bases. Collaboration between Tehran and Washington on stabilizing Iraq seemed doubtful at best.

In the last two months, though, there has been a shift in U.S. military and diplomatic attitudes toward Iran. Officials have backed away from sweeping accusations that the Iranian leadership is orchestrating massive smuggling of arms, agents and ammunition. Instead, they have agreed to a new round of talks with Iranian and Iraqi officials over security in Iraq. The meeting is expected to take place this month.

The U.S. also freed nine Iranian men last month, some of whom it had been holding since 2004.

Iraq also has served both Iran and the U.S. as a proxy battlefield for their dispute over Iran's nuclear ambitions, and it may serve both sides now in tamping down the tensions.

Washington hard-liners have suggested that military force be used against Iran over its refusal to drop its nuclear enrichment program, and linking Iran to the violence in Iraq could bolster their case for military action. Analysts say the U.S. shift reflects the increased assertiveness of more moderate military and civilian forces concerned about a possible backlash from Iran at a time when the U.S. military is badly stretched. Meanwhile, analysts say Iran may be looking for ways to avoid more international sanctions against its nuclear program.

The change has been echoed in the senior military leadership, particularly by the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, and the commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East, Navy Adm. William J. Fallon.

Both four-star admirals have given interviews in recent weeks in which they downplayed suggestions that the United States was preparing to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. Their comments were noteworthy because they came at the same time the White House, particularly Vice President Dick Cheney, had been delivering bellicose warnings against Tehran.

In an interview Nov. 12 with the Financial Times, Fallon described such rhetoric as "not particularly helpful."

Mullen has been more circumspect in public, but Pentagon officials familiar with his thinking say he is concerned about provoking extremist elements within the Iranian regime, which could make things worse in Iraq.

"You're just expanding the violence in the region instead of controlling it, essentially opening another front in the war," one military officer said, describing Mullen's thinking.

American military leaders have given Sadr tacit praise for reining in his Mahdi Army militia since February, when an additional 28,500 U.S. forces began arriving in Iraq to try to quell the violence.

U.S. officials had long accused Sadr's militia of enjoying Iranian support. Lately, they have said most Sadr loyalists are adhering to a cease-fire the cleric called in August and say only rogue elements operating out of Sadr's control are causing problems.

Analysts say the changes are the most hopeful signs of improved U.S.-Iranian relations since the start of the Iraq war in March 2003 and reflect a realization in Washington that both Iran and Sadr are powerful presences here to stay.

Gates has not publicly echoed the comments of Mullen and Fallon. But unlike Rumsfeld, who was frequently accused of muzzling senior military leaders, he has not rebuked them for their softer tone on Iran, a signal he is sympathetic to their stance.

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

America's Empire Tottering in Middle-East

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., October , 2007

These new Iran sancations are just the latest manifistation of Bush's unilateral International behavior. Iran has the right under international treaty to enrich uranium. Until Bush decided that international treaties mean nothing to the United States.

Shortly after taking office, Bush pulled out of the ABM treaty with Russia, ended negociation with N. Korea, and attacked Iraq against international law. Intentional violations of the Geneva Conventions against torture shortly followed Bush's illegal invasion.

Bush has continued to arm and aid three nations who illegally developed and possess nuclear weapons, India, Pakistan, and Israel, while denying Iran their sovereign right to develop nuclear power.

Bush's unreasonable stance towards Iran has historical roots that go back to the Iranian deposition of our Dictator, the Shah of Iran, in 1979. The Shah, alongside Israel, were the twin pillars of American Might in the Middle-East, and all nations in the region lived in the shadow of their might. 1979 changed all that.

Since then, we have treated Iran in much the same pattern as we have treated Cuba: We do not recognize the power of nations controlled by American Dictators or American-backed Corporate Elites to determine the terms of their own legitimacy or soveregnity. This tends to piss people off.

Since then Iran has survived 22 years of American economic isolation, the brutal 7 year American sponsored war with our then-buddy, Saddam, and every kind of economic and political pressue we could conjure up. Despite, or possibly because of these obstructions, Iran has prospered.

The spirit of self-determination that fueled Iran's Revolution of Independence from America has now intensified, radicalized, and spread across the whole Middle-East. All of America's dictators in the Middle-East are now facing the same dangers the Shah faced prior to his deposition.

America has responded by distancing ourself even further from our own values. We have hardened our support for our dictators, and turn a blind eye as they too kidnap, detain and torture their domestic political opponents. We sit by quietly as they threaten, imprison, and kill independent reporters.

Most disturbingly, we have created a legal black hole called "terrororism." This term trumps every law, Constitution, or international agreement that once held governments in check.

"Terror" declaring all who resist the American backed state violence used by the Saudi, Jordanian, Egyptian, and Israeli states to maintain their claims to legitimacy, to be "terrorists."

Bush's ill-concieved invasion of Iraq damaged the domestic political legitimacy of all of our Middle-Eastern allies from the very beginning of the war. Marching foreign troops into Iraq rekindled repugnant memories of British Colonial brutality, as well as the Crusades across the whole Middle-East.

Even more dangerously, Bush's failed invasions, and our impending defeats in Iraq and Afghanastan, have moved the body of middle-eastern opinion, not just to the point of sympathizing with the anti-American insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanastan, but has fueled independence movements in Egypt and Saudia Arabia as well.

The real victim is not just the honor and credit of the US, but the corporate fascism of the United States has discredited the notion and practice of democracy itelf.

The perpetual uglyness of our Iraqi and Afghan occupations is fuel to the fire of every Middle-Eastern independence movement, and has greatly contributed to the rise of Iran, again, as the dominant power in the Middle-East, under its own government, rather than one of our dictators.

This is the great complication, and the driving force behind the increasing US pressure on Iran: as Bush's idiocy continues to drive our wars to failure and damage our Middle-Eastern allies and influence, our failures simultanously feed the growth of Iran's power and influence.

Bush has stuck our arm into a bear trap. If he tries to pull it out, it will strip the flesh from our arm. If he pushes it in further, he will rip up fresh arm. Since Bush is incapable of thinking his way out of this crisis, we are fucked.

Bush's "solution" to the consequences of our Iraqi and Afghan disasters will be to spread the crisis to Iran. Bush is thinking that by bombing Iran into the Stone Age he will reduce Iran's ability to act on the regional oppertunities our Iraq and Afghan disasters have thrown on their doorstep.

This too, like the Iraq and Afghan invasions, will fail. A regional war will follow any attack on Iran, and this regional war will end the era of American-backed dictators in the Middle-East.

Iran will still, ultimatly, be the greatest benificiary of the rapid Middle-Eastern decolonization that is occuring before our eyes.

Our bombs may kill people, but they feed the ideas that are driving our opponents to victory.

Top of Page

Also See:

Is Bush plotting an Iranian "october surprize" for the US?

American plans for the future of Iran and the Middle-East

Links to news abstracts on Iran

Search the Corruption Database under



Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page

3) The Article linked below was Abstracted from the source cited.

Pentagon Cites Poor Controls for Iraq Fund


NYT, December 7, 2007





WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 (AP) — A Pentagon audit of a $5.2 billion fund used to train and equip Iraqi security forces found that United States commanders used sloppy accounting and could not always show that equipment, services and construction were delivered properly, according to a report released Thursday.

The report, by the Defense Department’s Office of Inspector General, said the command in charge, known as the Multinational Security Transition Command-Iraq, was unable to provide “reasonable assurance” that the money was used to achieve the intended results and that it was not wasted.

The inspector general audited equipment purchases valued at nearly $1.1 billion for armored vehicles, weapons, ammunition and other items, from two sets of supply sources. Of $643.1 million in purchases from one set of suppliers, the inspector general was able to follow a paper trail for 12.9 percent of the total, or $82.9 million. Of $438.2 million from the second set, an audit trail was available for only 1 percent.

The command could not account for 18 of 31 recovery vehicles valued at $10.2 million. Also, the command could not prove that Iraqi security forces received 2,126 of 2,943 generators valued at $7.0 million. It also could not account for 6 of 18 garbage trucks valued at $700,000.

Top of Page

What's Really Going on Here?

Bush Loses Guns, and Losing Chance to Steal Iraq's Oil

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., August 10, 2007

Earlier in the occupation, the Bush Administration "lost" hundreds of millions of dollars in Iraq. (8.8 Billion is a figure bandied about.)

Now they have "lost" thousands of automatic weapons. This was not incompetence, although there is plenty of that. This was not merely venal corruption, stealing, although there was plenty of that too. Among the incompetence and corruption there lurks another beast.

Bush is using a big chunk of these "lost" funds and guns to run a secret foreign policy. These funds and guns are probably being used in Ethiopia and Kenya to buy the support of local governments to invade Somalia.

A chunk of the "lost" money and guns have been spread across the middle east, put into the hands of any radical group that hates Shites, and will not openly defy the Saudi King.

What has really been lost and found in Iraq is more important the the billions of dollars that Bush has fucked off. What we lost in Iraq was the delusion that our President, or the system that produced and sustains him, has anything at all to do with democracy, our Constitution, or basic good will and common sense.

But Bush is not alone. He is part of a larger group, Congress, and behind them sits the wealth and power of our corporate aristocracy.

And as the Iraqi poll demonstrates, they have not only lost physical control of Iraq, and lost the hearts and minds of Iraqis, but they have lost any support there may have been in Iraq to give our oil companies their oil.

The only benefit Big Oil will draw from Iraq will continue to be the windfall profits they derive from the instability in oil markets their invasion caused. Big Oil, I mean the United States, will never get control of Iraq or its oil.


KBR, Cheney, Halliburton, Bush, Enron and Friends Robbing the US:

Money, Rights, Reputation, and Honor MIA

Alex Wierbinski, Berkeley, Ca., July 31, 2007

The Pentagon has been without an Inspector General for the duration of the Iraqi War. Cheney's company has been robbing us blind the whole time. Coincidence or part of a larger pattern of corruption?

Bush appointed industry corrupted incompetents to run the GSA, FDA, EPA, NASA, and the Justice and Interior Departments. Each has served the interests of private profit before public good. Each appointment reflects, and pays off, the bribes Bush collected to finance his runs for the Presidency.

Thus we have engaged in war not for security, but to serve greed. Thus we administer our greed war with greed and corruption.

The apple does not fall far from the tree.

Top of Page

Also See:


Corruption Updates 94, 6th article on the page, Bribery Network to Bloat War Costs Is Alleged: Bush and Friends Robbing the US Blind

Corruption Updates 108, 6th article on the page, Iraq Weapons Are a Focus of Criminal Investigations

Iraqi-Pentagon Fraud Links

Iraqi War Links


Search the Corruption Database under

Iraq War



Submit Comments Here

Please limit comments to 400 words, unless you write really well! Remember to include the Corruption Updates page number, and the article number on the page. Example: (82_1.)



All Archives

Top of Page


Previous page: Page 135                 Next page: Page 137

Contact Us: Committeefordemocracy.org


All Archives

Top of Page

Today's Headlines


1) CIA destroys evidence of Crimes against Humanity: Bush Torture Tapes

1b) LA Times article full of lies, deceptions about American War Crimes

1c) Liars in Congress to ban torture: They already did, and bush ignored them

1d) Idiot President claims ignorance

1e) Biden calls for independent investigation

Fake Iran Nuke threat

2) Bush admin lied for months about Iran nuke threat

2b) Bush accuses Iran of thought crime

2c) Iran refuses dollars for  oil purchases

2d) Iran-Russia talks

2e) Moderate Rafsanjani threatens US

2f) Bush Tempering Iran rhetoric anticipating exposure of his nuke threat lies

Government Thievery

3) Stealing our honor, rights, and now, Our Money: Billions in weaponry"lost" in Iraq