BUSH WATCH...MAUREEN FARRELL
hoot | 'toon | comment | features | today's news | news update | bushreport | archives | us | contact |
When
America Breaks Your Heart I
love you like the pilgrim loves the holy land - Writer
and Oscar-winning screenwriter, Steve Tesich Steve
Tesich's largely autobiographical, Four Friends is perhaps the most
charming, palpably heartfelt love letter to America the silver screen
has known. Its theme, achingly obvious within opening minutes, is embodied
in Tesich's alter ego, Danilo, who whispers "America" with
a reverence most reserve for prayer. "My friend Danilo is a national
anthem freak," one character asserts. "He goes to football
games so he can stand up and blend with the crowd of thousands to sing
'Oh say can you see.' In all of the time I've known him, I never heard
him say the United States once. It was always America, like he saw something
when he said it. . . . America." The
movie, released in 1982, was awarded the highest rating, four stars,
by critic Roger Ebert, who applauded its "clarity" and "truth." Yet
within a decade, Tesich would clearly see another truth; a truth far
more sinister and frightening than the naïve, optimistic, America-adoring
Danilo could imagine. "My
brother Steve (Stojan) Tesich was fifty-three when he died July 1,
1996 of a massive heart attack," his sister Professor Nadia
Tesich wrote. "In his short life he had written many plays, novels,
many film scripts, of which 'Breaking Away' is the best-known.. . . This
country was also his main subject -- America and the 'American Dream'
-- until the dream turned against him. .. . . His rage was great and
this man, known for his jokes and laughter, changed during these past
horrible five years. When I heard my brother was dead, my first words
to his wife were, "America killed him." Yes his anger against
it was huge. On some days, powerless, dying for justice, we could only
howl together. . . ." "My
brother was not a simple minded nationalist" she added. "He
was not even a political person. . . . Yet he noticed the deadly
display, advertising of weapons, and destruction during the US war on
Iraq. Both of us saw it, both of us opposed it. Metallic monsters in
the sky, no opposition to them in the media -- thus began a new era of
the US 'New World Order.' . . . [W]e watched lies and deceit in every
paper, every channel, as the US propaganda machine (more modern, more
deadly than anything Geobbels tried) moved to fabricate a new enemy,
to fill its own void -- a new monster had to be found. .." The
watchdog group, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) shared
Tescish's outrage. Describing the first Gulf War coverage as "enthusiastic
cheerleading" and "boosterism for the war effort," FAIR
deemed Gulf War coverage "one of the most disturbing episodes in
U.S. journalistic history." http://www.fair.org/extra/best-of-extra/gulf-war.html Then,
like now, airways were crammed with promises that bombing campaigns
were "surgical strikes against military targets," even as some
Pentagon staff openly copped to deliberately destroying parts of Iraq's
infrastructure. Pundits' comparisons of shock and awe to "action
movies" characterize the familiar disconnect between deed and consequence
and Donald Rumsfeld's promise of "precise" and "humane" military
strategies doesn't reassure. As we watch the blitzing of Baghdad and
Pentagon spokesmen warn that U.S. missiles, meant for Iraq, "may
have landed in Iran," ghosts of blunders and fabrications past hover
within history's ether. "The world will note that the first atomic
bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, a military base," Harry Truman declared. "That
was because we wished in this first attack, to avoid, as much as possible,
the killing of civilians." 100,000 were killed at Hiroshima. Most
were civilians. Lights, Camera, War! As
officials and correspondents assure Americans that only evil doers
will be killed during "Operation Iraqi Freedom," if the pre-war
sales pitch is any indication, the coverage during Gulf War II promises
to be jam-packed with even more blatant propaganda. "Smart bombs" have
given way to "the Mother of All Bombs" and in lieu of 15 year-olds
fibbing about babies in incubators, we have the President of the United
States lying about nearly everything. Anchors bray about our military
power and strength (one NBC commentator even suggested that Baghdad residents
must be "awed" by U.S. intelligence capabilities) while others
inform Stepford citizens of their fearless leaders' emotions. The description
of the White House's "upbeat mood" during preliminary shock
and awe stages was only slightly more appalling than observations on
the coup that put Saddam's party in power, which, like good propaganda,
conveniently ignored the US' role in any of it. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,916235,00.html Moreover,
as Ari Fleischer mentions our 3000 dead to justify horrors unleashed
(overlooking, once again, that Iraq had nothing to do with
those deaths), correspondents report from a far off land where GOP and
military control meld with Hollywood razzle dazzle. Even as Colin Powell
was sharing fabricated evidence and pretending, for a time, to let inspections
work, the U.S. military was constructing a $1.5 million media center
in Qatar, designed, in part, by Hollywood set designer George Allison,
the art director who adds the Orwellian ambiance to George Bush's "Corporate
Responsibility" speeches. Headed
by former Bush campaign aide Jim Wilkinson, (the spokesman for the
Miami-based protestors trying to stop the Florida recount during
the 2000 election), the entire Qatar-based public affairs operation is
responsible for overseeing 42 military public affairs officers charged
with managing hundreds of international correspondents covering the war.
And given veteran BBC reporter Kate Adie's report that the Pentagon has
threatened to shoot down independent journalists' satellite uplink positions,
it's safe to say that most of the news Americans see from Baghdad will
be U.S.A. approved. http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/from_buzzflash.html Michael Moore Explains it All to You This
isn't to say that America will be living behind an iron curtain, of
course. It's still a free country, as they say. The Oprah Winfrey
show, for example, recently featured a Michael Moore interview, and,
through a clip from his Oscar-nominated Bowling for Columbine introduced
millions to a side of American foreign policy few ever see. As Louie
Armstrong sang, "What a Wonderful World," the following statistics
flashed upon the screen: 1953:
U.S. overthrows Prime Minister Mossadeq of Iran 1954
U.S. overthrows democratically-elected President Arbenz of Guatemala.
200,000 civilians killed 1963: U.S. backs assassination of South Vietnamese President Diem 1963 --1975: American military kills 4 million people in Southeast
Asia September 11, 1973: U.S. stages a coup in Chile. Democratically-elected
President Salvador Allende assassinated. Dictator Augusto Pinochet installed;
5,000 Chileans killed 1977:
U.S. backs military rulers of El Salvador. 70,000 Salvadorians and
four American nuns killed 1980s:
U.S. trains Osama bin Laden and fellow terrorists to kill Soviets.
CIA gives them $3 billion 1981: Reagan administration trains and funds 'contras' 30,000 Nicaraguans
die 1982:
U.S. provides billions in aid to Saddam Hussein for weapons to kill
Iranians. 1983: White House secretly gives Iran weapons to kill Iraqis 1989: CIA agent Manuel Noriega (also serving as president of Panama)
disobeys orders from Washington. US invades Panama and removes Noriega
3,000 Panamanian civilian casualties 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait with weapons from the U.S. 1991:
U.S. enters Iraq. Bush reinstates dictator of Kuwait 1991-
present: American planes bomb Iraq on a weekly basis. U.N. estimates
500,000 Iraqi children die from bombings and sanctions. 1998:
Clinton bombs "weapons factory" in Sudan. Factory turns
out to be making aspirin. 2000-01
U.S. gives Taliban-ruled Afghanistan $245 million in "aid." September 11, 2001: Osama bin Laden uses his CIA training to murder
3,000 people. Though
most are now aware that anti-American sentiment is rising, many avoid
introspection, and instead join pundits and politicians in pointing
fingers at France. And so, Moore's timely reminder has never been more
urgent: "The rest of the world knows we've done these things," has
says. "We just don't want to believe this about ourselves. And I
mean, who would?" Remaining
ignorant is costly, however, especially as we forge ahead with the
same kind of behavior that's brought us to this place. "Well,
you lost 3000 people," Moore imagines citizens in other countries
saying. "We here in Southeast Asia lost 4 million. We here in Guatemala
lost 200,000. We here in Chile lost 10,000 people. . . They're
not so sympathetic if we are going to ignore what's being done in our
name." And that's where we find ourselves. Like Steve Tesich, those of us
who've deeply loved America, and believed, despite her flaws, that she
was the land of the free and home and the brave (with liberty and justice
for all, amen) feel betrayed, heartbroken and angry by what's transpired
since Sept 11. If Russia or China behaved this way, Americans would unite
in condemnation, and correspondents would be acting like objective journalists,
instead of cheering the carnage on. But
make no mistake. The rest of the world will never forget our preventative
war -- or scenes from the blitz on Baghdad. We've crossed a sad and horrifying
threshold from which is no return, no matter how swift and successful
this military campaign may be. How can we support our country's actions
without betraying conscience? How can we express this sinking feeling
without (as many accuse) betraying our troops? On some days, powerless, dying for justice, we [can] only howl together. --03.27.03
Richard Perle, Ann Coulter and America's Savage Regression
Thirty-five years ago, Walter Cronkite returned from a visit to Vietnam and challenged President Lyndon Johnson's promises about American victories. "We've been too often disappointed by the optimism of the American leaders, both in Vietnam and Washington," he said, "to have faith any longer in the silver linings they find in the darkest clouds. For it seems now more certain than ever that the bloody experience of Vietnam is to end in a stalemate."
`If I've lost Cronkite, I've lost the country,' Johnson later remarked.
Can you imagine President Bush making a similar observation of any newscaster?
These days, as veterans like Helen Thomas are "called out" and others hurl powder puffs during puppet show press conferences, good journalists are hard to find. And it seems, as with Afghanistan, few will be reporting from Iraq whatsoever. According to the BBC's Kate Adie, the Pentagon is warning it will shoot down satellite uplink positions of independent journalists stationed there and is "threatening freedom of information" even before the war starts.
http://www.gulufuture.com/news/kate_adie030310.htm
To make matters worse, as the shades go down in Iraq, another oppressive phenomenon is occurring on the home front. Michael Savage, who advocates arresting leaders of the antiwar movement once combat starts, uses his MSNBC platform to call for a return to yesteryear, 1918 specifically, when the Sedition Act was all the rage.
The Sedition Act, http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/wwi/1918/usspy.html,
for those too young to remember Eugene Debs, made speaking out against the government a punishable offense. "Whoever, when the United States is at war," the document reads (before listing several seditious offenses). . . "shall willfully utter, print, write, or publish any disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States. . . shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment for not more than twenty years, or both."
Would Walter Cronkite's Vietnam stance make him a right wing target today? Probably. Because just one day after Savage's televised appeal to criminalize active dissent, Richard Perle told CNN's Wolf Blitzer that journalist Seymour Hersh "is the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist." And now that Sean Penn, George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Spike Lee and other celebrates have been blacklisted from speaking at the Oscars, McCarthyism is all the rage. Who would have thought that the '70s, with its Farrah Faucett posters and Captain and Tennille duets, would ever be considered a Golden Age of Enlightenment?
What has happened to America? How has it regressed beyond recognition? More and more, it looks as if our nation is taking a giant leap backwards in terms of leadership, the media and the quality of our national debate. Since the Federal Communications Commission eliminated the Fairness Doctrine in the mid 1980s, many broadcasters haven't even attempted to present balanced coverage of controversial issues. And though the Chicago Sun Times recently announced that talk radio was "the key to GOP victory," (showing how effective this shilling can be), media personalities and government spokesman are becoming increasingly hostile as they propel us towards war -- especially in their attempts to squelch dissent.
A Matter of Treason
Though Bill O'Reilly recently retracted his statements that dissidents would be "spotlighted" and considered "enemies of the state," Ann Coulter is poised to follow her best-selling Slander with the June publication of Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism. Like a rancid batch of Windsong, her February 2002 observation on leftist treason stays on one's mind. "We need to execute people like John Walker, in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed too," she said. "Otherwise they will turn out to be outright traitors." Will her book contain more of the same? And if so, is this simply mindless hyperbole or is it something worse?
In an October 2001 article entitled "Liberties Lost: Unintended Consequences of the Anti-Terror Law," former White House counsel John Dean lamented that the "right to dissent" was in jeopardy. Charging that the USA PATRIOT Act twisted the definition of domestic terrorism to include "homegrown political activists," his concern was that any act "that appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population," is considered terrorism.
Robert Higgs, a senior fellow in political economy at the Independent Institute, made a similar observation regarding the leaked Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003. "The most innocent action -- from signing a petition or making a charitable contribution," he warned, could be considered "an act of terrorism" and "almost anything could be defined as an applicable offense." Given this, could Coulter and Savage's labels of "treason" apply? And could Sy Hersh indeed be considered a "terrorist?"
Moreover, the DSEA would also resuscitate John Ashcroft's Alice Kravitzian TIPS program, encouraging neighbor to spy on neighbor, while granting immunity to anyone filing dishonest claims. "I can only hope people will wake up to what is happening," Higgs told the Washington Times. "It seems to me that when we enacted the USA Patriot Act, the United States came closer to being a police state. If Patriot II is enacted we have kissed the Constitution goodbye."
Perhaps we should stop imagining that all this mean-spirited banter is mere entertainment and start asking where it might lead? As Michael Savage's critics fret about him advocating labor camps for those exhibiting "seditious behavior" and as loose talk of treason and terrorism is bandied about, maybe it's wise to remember Rep. Henry Gonzalez's warning that there are "standby provisions" and "statutory emergency plans. . . whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism, apprehend, invoke the military, and arrest Americans and hold them in detention camps?" Or to reread the LA Times' account of Ashcroft's stated desire for such camps? http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/08.15B.ashcr.camps.htm
It's a Conspiracy!
Another example of how far we've fallen is amplified in the ways talk shows cover and react to controversial issues. In January, 1968, for, example Jim Garrison appeared on The Tonight Show to discuss his theories on the Warren Commission report. Debating ideas considered ludicrous and nearly blasphemous at the time, Garrison presented his controversial point of view -- despite the tension that naturally arose.
"The function of the Warren Commission was to make the American people feel that the [JFK assassination] had been looked into so that there would be no further inquiries," Garrison told an incredulous Johnny Carson, "so that the American people would not find out the involvement of elements of the Central Intelligence Agency, so that they would think the matter was closed."
Carson lost patience several times throughout the interview, and, though jovial and polite by today's standards, was described as "antagonistic" by some. Feeling the need to apologize for Carson's demeanor, NBC sent out thousands of form letters saying, "The Johnny seen on TV that night was not the Johnny we all know and love. He had to play the devil's advocate, because that makes for a better program."
http://www.astridmm.com/prouty/audio2.html (Interviews with Johnny Carson segments)
In contrast, Gore Vidal's recent Crossfire appearance is indicative of the ways that sniping, and not thoughtful consideration, forges much of today's debate. Promoting his new book, Dreaming War: Blood For Oil and the Cheney-Bush Junta, Vidal relayed information many Americans remain unaware of, including the role Caspian Sea oil played in the war in Afghanistan. The atmosphere turned antagonistic, however, and Vidal interjected, "So one thing, if I may make a suggestion to Tucker. . . Don't personalize everything. One of the reasons that television is so dreadful and unwatchable by anybody with an IQ slightly above room temperature, except as a sport like this in which you get a lot of people shouting, everything is personalities."
http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/02/26/cf.opinion.gore.vidal/index.html
A Tale of Two Presidents
What, you might wonder, does any of this have to do with the average American citizen? Everything. Because the most concrete symbol of our mean-spirited regression can be found at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Personal peccadilloes (like blowing up frogs and mocking death row inmate Karla Faye Tucker's plea for clemency) aside, Bush's squandering of America's global goodwill and his disastrous handling of Iraq is indicative of how far our nation has fallen. Though Rupert Murdoch's band of neo-conservative writers employ WWII analogies (much to quality historians' chagrin), if one were to give the president the benefit of the doubt, and buy into disarmament as Bush' causis belli, perhaps a more apt comparison might be found in the link between the Cuban missile crisis and disarming Iraq.
Though there have been many versions of "the missiles of October," White House tapes reveal what really happened during those 13 days. On October 26, 1962, after receiving word that Khrushchev had offered to trade Russia's Cuban missiles for US missiles in Turkey, JFK argued that, "It's going to look to any man at the United Nations or any other rational man like a very fair trade."
In addition to showing concern for the United Nations, Kennedy's commitment to our allies is also evident in these tapes. Worrying about the United States' relationships with England, Germany and the rest of Europe if America ignored Khrushchev's reasonable proposal, Kennedy's global concern is especially evident. "We can't very well invade Cuba with all its toil," he said, "when we could have gotten them out by making a deal on the same missiles in Turkey. If that's part of the record then I fear we won't have a very good war." http://www.hpol.org/jfk/cuban/
When contrasted with the Bush administration's lack of concern for "just war" criteria and its disastrous diplomacy over Iraq and desire to bully and/or dismantle the U.N., memories of the Cuban missile crisis punctuate what we've lost. Not only has Bush ignored the advice of our allies and clergymen worldwide, but he's repeatedly made it clear that it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. His warning that "there will be a certain sense of discipline" if Mexico or other nations didn't vote for America's Iraq resolution and the Economist's stunning report on the U.S diplomat who warned that failure to support a U.S. resolution might "stir up feelings" against Mexicans in America comparable to those faced by Japanese-Americans interned after 1941 are the sentiments of Neanderthals, not leaders.
"An illegitimate war, a country in defiance of the UN. That was supposed to be Iraq's role in this drama. Instead, it seems to be the U.S. part," asserts Canada's Globe and Mail, before describing "just how far the United States has drifted from the global mood." And according to former National Security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, America "has never been so isolated globally, literally never, since 1945."
Perhaps that is what happens when America regresses - and others forge ahead. --03.13.03
Anti-American? Take this Quiz and Find Out!
1) The Constitution of the United States is:
a) An amazing achievement and a gift from America's founders.
2) The Founding Fathers' prescient vision can be found in:
a) George Washington's observation that America should, "observe good faith and justice toward all nations" and should "cultivate peace and harmony with all."
3) Pivotal legislative moments in American History include:
a) The ratification of the U.S. Constitution, after heated debates and the inclusion of the Bill of Rights.
4) Recently leaked draft legislation, the Domestic Security Act of 2003, shows that the Justice Department:
a) Is considering secret arrests for the first time in American history.
b) Has developed a plan to strip Americans of their citizenship (for violations citizens might not even be aware of).
5) Since George W. Bush's inauguration:
a) There have been over 300 rollbacks in the Freedom of Information Act, giving credence to Rep. Dan Burton's concern that there is "an iron veil descending over the executive branch."
6) Justifications for America's involvement in wars include:
a) Unprovoked (but blatantly false) attacks by North Vietnamese torpedo boats on two US destroyers in the Gulf of Tonkin.
7) Democracies that champion America's upcoming war with in Iraq are:
a) England, where 7 out of 8 citizens disagree with military action against Iraq.
8) People who oppose war with Iraq include:
a) The Pope and the National Council of Churches.
9) France and Germany's plan for Iraq:
a) Calls for peaceful disarmament and engages the international community.
10) America's contemporary patriots include:
a) Pentagon Papers patriot Daniel Ellsberg, who, in addition to unveiling sordid truths about the Vietnam War, shed light on ways the executive branch routinely lies to Congress, the Senate and the American people.
Congratulations! If you answered "e" to these questions, you're better informed than most. Although, frankly, since half of all Americans believe Iraq was involved in Sept. 11 and 87 % of college-aged students can't find Iraq on a map, it's not a monumental achievement.
Then, too, sadly, we live in a time when being informed is enough to brand you "anti-American." Don't believe the U.S. should engage in preemptive strikes? Wonder if America has the right to topple countries' leaders, install our own governments and occupy these countries for decades? Don't appreciate increases to the defense budget's already mammoth $400 billion price tag or that America is now more Empire than Republic? In other words, is "taxation without representation" getting you down?
Take heart. Though some may call you anti-American, you're not the first to feel this way.
As Thomas Jefferson reminded in the Declaration of Independence, "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it. . ."
Face it, these days, Thomas Jefferson (and several other Founding Fathers) would be considered anti-American, too. --02.10.03 The Israeli Elephant In Bush's War Room.
As the weapons of mass destruction excuse becomes increasingly more difficult to swallow (thanks, in part, to North Korea and to the Bush administration's painfully obvious disappointment in Iraq's weapons inspection cooperation), two theories regarding the underlying reasons for the upcoming war have gained momentum. Most critics assert that the war is mostly about oil and certainly, several signs suggest that's so. The premeditated divvying up of Iraq's resources and Ahmed Chalabi's promise to reward American oil companies with "a big shot at Iraqi oil' are but two examples. Others cite America's desire for global domination as the primary motivation, referring to Zbigniew Brzezinski's THE GRAND CHESSBOARD: American Primacy And Its Geostrategic Imperatives, the Project for a New America Century and President Bush's official military strategy as sources. Both arguments make sense, as greed and power have traditionally underscored military conflicts, and members of the administration have shown they're not above dirtying their hands in murky deeds and deals.
There is a third reason for this war, however, which is rarely discussed: The absurd notion that waging war in Iraq and other parts of the Arab world will stabilize the Middle East and make it more hospitable to Israel. In other words, at least 500,000 more Iraqis will die, and at least $100 billion more U.S dollars will be spent on a preemptive war based on the assertion that Arab countries will welcome a U.S-led "liberation" and Israel will finally be safe and secure.
In an article entitled, "The Peace Movement is Making a Mistake: Oil Shouldn't Be The Only Reason for Opposing This War," http://www.ccmep.org/2003_articles/Iraq/012103_oil_shouldnt.htm, former CIA analysts Kathleen and Bill Christison address this concern, arguing that Ariel Sharon has been calling for Saddam Hussein's removal as a plan for "transforming" the Middle East for more than two decades. Neo-Conservatives argue that America can topple Iraq's dictator, move onto other countries and spread democracy throughout the region, as if Middle Eastern history would suddenly reverse course and take a pro-Israel, pro-American turn. Perhaps they might recall Secretary of State George C. Marshall's famous warning regarding how the recognition of Israel would result in war? Today's warning bells echo with similar understatement.
Then, too, perhaps they have forgotten our dismal record establishing democracies in places like Iran, Chile, Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama and other parts of the world -- Including the coup that put Saddam Hussein's party into power in the first place. Or how the U.S. ambassador's warning to Bolivia's citizens against supporting the Socialist candidate in last year's election was met with a 198 percent increase in support for the candidate -- just as public support for Yassar Arafat was revived by Bush's directive he step aside. Will Iraq be more compliant to U.S. wishes? Or will occupying forces have to continuously make them offers they can't refuse?
The Christisons also believe that George Bush and Karl Rove are using the Middle East transformation approach to increase their chances of earning votes in the presidential election. Arguing that this issue is at least as important to the war in Iraq as oil is, they say that those who oppose the war "should be facing this issue of Middle East transformation head-on, not ignoring it for tactical reasons or out of fear of charges of anti-Semitism."
Yet that is not so simple. Others, like Robert Fisk, who have openly questioned Ariel Sharon's influence on U.S. policy, know too well how such charges arise. "[I]n much of the Western world, a vicious campaign of slander is being waged against any journalist or activist who dares to criticize Israeli policies or those that shape them," he wrote in the Independent. "The all-purpose slander of 'anti-Semitism' is now used with ever-increasing promiscuity against anyone -- people who condemn the wickedness of Palestinian suicide bombings every bit as much as they do the cruelty of Israel's repeated killing of children -- in an attempt to shut them up."
Perhaps this is why activists ignore this elephant in America's war room. Should America spend billions of dollars and spill American blood on the unlikely premise that it would make the Middle East more stable and more secure for Israel? Especially when many believe it will make Israel and America less safe in the long run?
Increasingly, traditional conservatives are joining liberal counterparts in opposition to such Neo-Crazy war plans. A group of business leaders who took out an ad in the Jan. 14, 2003 Wall Street Journal, for example, addressed the ridiculous notion that Arab nations would welcome American occupation. In an open letter to George W. Bush, http://www.anitaroddick.com/weblog/weblogdetail.jsp?title=null&id=371, they reacted to the Neo-Conservative agenda thusly: "Our jaws drop when we read that you may decide we have to occupy Iraq for years, that the next ruler of Iraq may be ... an American general! Is there anyone who thinks that will work? Your odds of success are infinitesimal."
Yet, a Jewish friend wrote that yes, she thinks America and Israel can pull this off, and that the war in Iraq will be welcomed by Arabs and the world. "To me, a liberated Iraq means another place to visit with my husband when my kids go to camp in the summer," she wrote, "I will spend lots of his money on souvenirs, thus helping their economy."
If an attack on Iraq didn't loom so large, I'd tell her she might be better served vacationing in the Land of Wishful Thinking. Yet our foreign policy is being hijacked by people who believe in this fairy tale. Will Iraq suddenly be transformed into the tap-dancing slave in a Shirley Temple movie? Thanking us for pats on the head and the bobbles and trinkets we generously buy?
No, many of us are more prone to agree with the likes of Gen. Brent Scowcroft who warns that an attack on Iraq will cause an "Armageddon in the Middle East" and believe those Wall Street Journal-reading Republican dissidents who remarked that, "A billion bitter enemies will rise out of this war." We don't see grateful Iraqis living happily off the kindness of strangers, but a tragic legacy that will harm our children - and theirs. 01.26.03
A Brief (But Creepy) History of America's Creeping Fascism
"Public health officials want to shut down roads and airports, herd people into sports stadiums and, if needed, quarantine entire cities in the event of a smallpox attack".- the Boston Herald, Nov. 8, 2001 http://www.bostonherald.com/news/ americas_new_war/pox11082001.htm
"Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft's announced desire for camps for U.S. citizens he deems to be 'enemy combatants' has moved him from merely being a political embarrassment to being a constitutional menace." -the Los Angeles Times, Aug. 14, 2002 http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/08.15B.ashcr.camps.htm
The Bush administration is developing a parallel legal system in which terrorism suspects -- U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike -- may be investigated, jailed, interrogated, tried and punished without legal protections guaranteed by the ordinary system. . . . " - the Washington Post, Dec. 1, 2002
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58308-2002Nov30.html
These days, it's hard to read anything without thinking, "this can't be true." We're living in an age of secret bunker governments and stealth legislation, however, and unlikely scenarios are tempered with the realization our old reality is gone. This America differs drastically from the country we knew two years ago, when tales of felons ogling our e-mail would have been capped with a punch line. Yet here we are, scratching our heads, while guardians of the public trust shill for the state. When Chris Matthews responds to Christopher Hitchens' charges against Henry Kissinger by braying about how "our very free notion of the first amendment," allows Hitchens to say "anything he wants about somebody," (as if Hitchens were making things up), our airways are either populated by the misinformed or by those paid to propagandize.
Luckily, we can still count on some to deliver hard truths. In an October 2001 article entitled "Liberties Lost: Unintended Consequences of the Anti-Terror Law," for example, former White House counsel John Dean lamented that the "right to dissent" was in jeopardy. Charging that the USA PATRIOT Act twisted the definition of domestic terrorism to include "home-grown political activists," his concern was well-founded -- especially now that no-fly lists target peacenik clergymen and any act "that appears to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population," is considered terrorism. But though the Patriot Act's sunset clause assured temporary expanded powers, if our loss of liberty is unintended, why does Homeland Secretary legislation permanently authorize 'data-mining' ala John Poindexter's Total Information Awareness snoop shop? Is it unintentional? Or is it something else? Consider, if you will, the history of America's creeping fascism, from 1950 on:
1950: Congress approves the Security Act of 1950 which contains an emergency civilian detention plan that remains in effect for more than 20 years; the US government establishes the first program to develop human mind control techniques. Known under a variety of codenames (most notably MKULTRA) throughout its 23 year history, this program is designed to exert such control, according to declassified documents, that an individual will do another's bidding, "against his will and even against such fundamental laws of nature such as self-preservation." 25 years later, the Rockefeller Commission uncovers CIA plans for "programmed assassins" and says MKULTRA led to American citizens being drugged, kidnapped and tortured on American soil.
1954: The McCarthy hearings begin. Nearly 50 years later, McCarthyism is revisited as assorted professors appear on assorted lists. "The simple exercise of the First Amendment, of saying that we should be able to criticize our government, is enough to put you on Lynne Cheney's list," historian Howard Zinn remarks.
Jan. 17, 1961: Dwight D. Eisenhower delivers his farewell address. "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military/industrial complex," he warns. "The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
March 13, 1962: Defense Secretary Robert McNamara receives Operation Northwoods, a plan to wage terrorist attacks against American citizens and blame Fidel Castro as a pretext for war with Cuba. http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/jointchiefs_010501.html "We could blow up a U.S. ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba," the document reads. "Casualty lists in U.S. newspapers would cause a helpful wave of national indignation," it continues. All Joint Chiefs of Staff sign off on the plan, but it's nixed by the civilian leadership.
Nov. 22, 1963: President John F. Kennedy is assassinated. Years later, only 77% of Americans believe the Warren Commission report is accurate. In 1988, The Nation reports on an F.B.I. memorandum, dated November 29, 1963, with the subject head "Assassination of President John F. Kennedy November 22, 1963" in which Hoover reports the FBI had briefed "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" on the post-assassination reaction of Cuban exiles in Miami.
1967: President Johnson establishes the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, assisted by an Army task force and plans to use military force to squelch civil disturbances take root. On May 4, 1970, four students are killed at Kent State University when the Ohio National Guard fires at unarmed protesters.
1971: Sen. Sam Ervin's Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights uncovers a military intelligence surveillance system used against thousands of American citizens, and stumbles upon Operation Garden Plot, the United States Civil Disturbance Plan 55-2. According to information released under the Freedom of Information Act in 1990, Plan 55-2 gives federal forces power to "put down" "disruptive elements" and calls for "deadly force to be used against any extremist or dissident perpetrating any and all forms of civil disorder."
1975: Journalists Ron Ridenhour and Arthur Lublow investigate Operation Cable Splicer, a subplan of Operation Garden Plot, designed to control civilian populations and take over state and local governments. Bill Moyers later lists Operation Cable Splicer and Garden Plot among examples of ways "the secret government [has] waged war on the American people." Sen. Frank Church's Committee to Study Government Operations sheds light on government-sanctioned civil rights abuses, the CIA's Mafia connections and the Nixon administration's role in Chile's 1973 coup.
1977: In a Rolling Stone article, Carl Bernstein estimates that "400 American journalists [have] been tied to the CIA at one point or another," giving credence to former CIA director William Colby's boast that "the Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any major significance in the major media."
1982-84: Col. Oliver North helps draft secret wartime contingency plans, which, according to a 2002 report in the Sydney Morning Herald, provide for "the imposition of martial law, internment camps, and the turning over of government to the president and FEMA." Columnist Jack Anderson reports that FEMA's emergency "standby legislation" is meant to "suspend the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, effectively eliminate private property, abolish free enterprise, and generally clamp Americans in a totalitarian vise."
1984: The Rex-84 "readiness exercise" program is conducted by 34 federal departments and agencies under Ronald Reagan's directive. Reportedly established to control illegal aliens crossing the Mexican/U.S. border, the exercise tests military readiness to round up and detain citizens in case of massive civil unrest.
1985: The Federal Communications Commission eliminates the Fairness Doctrine, which required broadcasters to present balanced coverage of controversial issues and kept their power to mold public opinion in check. In Dec. 2002, the Daily Howler http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh120402.shtml chronicles ways the Republican National Committee relied on media propaganda during the 2000 election, while a Dec. 3, 2002 Chicago Sun Times headline reads, "Talk radio key to GOP victory."
July 5, 1987: The Miami Herald reports that while deputy director, John Brinkerhoff modeled FEMA's martial law program after Louis Giuffrida's proposal to squelch black militant uprisings by placing "at least 21 million American Negroes" into "assembly centers or relocation camps." In Feb. 2002, Brinkerhoff writes a paper for the Anser Institute for Homeland Security defending the Pentagon's desire to deploy troops on American streets.
Aug. 1987: Though the Iran-Contra scandal involves criminal activity far more serious than 1974's Watergate burglary, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush emerge from the hearings virtually unscathed. Several Iran-Contra figures are awarded top jobs in George W. Bush's administration.
Summer, 1994: A memo leaked from the Director of Resource Management for the Department of the Army discusses plans to "establish civilian prison camps on [military] installations." Rep. Henry Gonzalez later admits that there are "standby provisions" and "statutory emergency plans. . . whereby you could, in the name of stopping terrorism, apprehend, invoke the military, and arrest Americans and hold them in detention camps."
Dec. 13, 2000: Al Gore concedes the presidential election after the Supreme Court installs George W. Bush President of the United States. Alan Dershowitz later writes that this unprecedented decision "threatens to undermine the moral authority of the high court for generations to come."
Sept. 11, 2001: President Bush activates a Cold-War era shadow government, installing cabinet members in underground bunkers. When this plan is uncovered months later, members of Congress claim they were not consulted.
Oct., 2001: The Patriot Act is railroaded through Congress and the Senate, without the benefit of committee hearings or extended debate, shortly after Democratic legislators are targeted in yet-to-be solved anthrax attacks.
Nov. 2001: The Bush administration issues executive orders allowing for the use of special military courts and empowering Atty. General John Ashcroft to detain non-citizens indefinitely; the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MEHPA) is introduced to governors of all 50 states. MEHPA calls for mandatory vaccinations and allows for confiscation of citizen's real estate, food, medicine and other private property; and outlines plans to herd afflicted citizens into stadiums.
Feb. 13, 2002: Iran-Contra criminal John Poindexter is chosen to head the Pentagon's Total Information Awareness Program, giving this five-time felon power to monitor citizens' internet use, e-mail, travel plans, credit-card purchases and other personal data. On Feb. 18, London's Guardian newspaper runs a story on the implications of Poindexter's appointment. The American media follows suit nine months later.
April, 2002: The US military creates a Northern Command to assist in homeland defense. Director of Homeland Security Tom Ridge encounters difficulties studying Reagan's national security plans for using the military for law enforcement, since Bush #43 sealed Reagan's presidential papers in Nov., 2001.
Summer, 2002: Former presidential counsel John Dean writes an article asking, "Could terrorism result in a constitutional dictator?" A month later, the Sydney Morning Herald reports that the Bush administration might employ Reagan-era security initiatives, installing "internment camps and martial law in the United States." The LA Times reports on Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft's "desire for [detention] camps."
Fall, 2002: During the midterm elections, Vietnam veteran and triple amputee Max Cleland is shamelessly depicted as "unpatriotic" for voicing concerns over homeland security legislation. Questions regarding Paul Wellstone's plane crash, voting machine irregularities or exit poll glitches remain taboo.
Nov. 25, 2002: After the 32 page Homeland Security Bill ballooned to nearly 500 pages overnight, and was railroaded through the Senate and Congress, it is signed into law. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) says the bill "expands the federal police state," Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-VT) says it represents "the most severe weakening of the Freedom of Information Act" in 36 years and Sen. Robert Byrd worries amendments "expand the [administration's] culture of secrecy." Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) claims that "the ability of a special interest group to secretly insert provisions into law for its own narrow benefit and to the detriment of the public interest raises fundamental questions about the integrity of our government."
Nov. 27, 2002: Cover-up King Henry Kissinger is chosen to head the Sept. 11 independent Commission. Robert Sheer reports that "history puts credibility at zero in the 9/11 probe."
Dec. 4, 2002: Solicitor General Theodore Olsen goes before the Supreme Court in an attempt to overturn the Miranda decision, which has restrained police interrogations for decades. "This is a case to be concerned about,'' University of California law professor Charles Weisselberg says. "To see the solicitor general arguing that there's no right to be free from coercive interrogation is pretty aggressive."
Thomas Jefferson warned, "When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny." It's difficult to fathom what we're stuck with now, when we consider from whence we came. As the Constitutional Convention came to a close, a woman asked Benjamin Franklin what type of government had been formed. "A Republic, if you can keep it," he replied.
Given our free fall within the last two years, and the fact that the morning "news shows" are more concerned with J-Lo's wedding dress than with our evolving police state, one can only imagine our founding fathers' reactions to recent history -- and to the shaky condition of our Republic today.
12.08.02
Disgruntled Soldiers on a Grassy Knoll
"The broad mass of a nation," wrote Adolph Hitler, "will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one."
In our lifetimes, we've been told several big lies; held afloat by a subset of ridiculous smaller ones. The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution and "I am not a crook" come readily to mind. Because, though one cringes to give him credit, Hitler was right. The smaller lies are easy to spot, while the larger ones remain shrouded in uncertainty.
For years, for example, people believed Lee Harvey Oswald was John F. Kennedy's lone assassin, based upon the patently absurd single bullet theory, put forth by Warren Commission member Sen. Arlen Specter. A recent New York Times/CBS poll, however, found that a whopping 77 percent of Americans reject the Warren Report's findings, while a 2001 study published in Britain's Forensic Science Society' s "Science and Justice," showed, with 96.3 percent certainty, that a second gunman fired at JFK. (Study Backs Theory of 'Grassy Knoll' HTTP://WWW.WASHINGTONPOST.COM/AC2/WP-DYN?PAGENAME=ARTICLE&NODE=&CONTENTID=A56560-2001MAR25).
Even as pundits laugh about "grassy knolls" and mainstream journalists chide us, we learn that Bill Clinton reportedly asked Webster Hubbell to find answers to two questions: "One, who killed JFK? And, two, are there UFOs?" Since pertinent Kennedy assassination records have been sealed until 2039, most of us will never find out.
The magic bullet theory lives on.
Forty years (and one Anita Hill) later, Arlen Specter is making news once again. Months ago, headlines announced Specter's bold assertion that, had they connected the dots, FBI counterintelligence supervisors would have had a "veritable blueprint" prior to Sept. 11. And just this past October, papers reported on Specter's request for a new investigation into the Oklahoma City bombing.
Of course, most of us thought Timothy McVeigh's execution put an end to that all that, but apparently (and conveniently) loose ends remain. Unable to finger Iraq for Sept. 11, conservatives like Frank Gaffney have been insinuating that Saddam is to blame for Oklahoma City, too. During a recent Crossfire appearance, Gaffney openly questioned the official story and the audience laughed, as Paul Bagala likened it to O.J.'s search for the "real killers." Days later, in the Washington Times, Gaffney further expounded -- citing the investigative work of Jayna Davis.
A former reporter with KFOR in Oklahoma City, Davis was one of the first to arrive at the scene of the 1995 bombing, and one of the first to realize something was amiss. Since then, she's deciphered 80 pages of affidavits from more than 20 eyewitnesses, while sifting through more than 2,000 supporting documents that suggest, among other things, that Timothy McVeigh did not act alone. Davis cites reports that McVeigh had an alleged dark-haired accomplice, identified as "John Doe No. 2." But since all 12 surveillance cameras were confiscated, this remains unproven.
Live television reports from Oklahoma City also suggest that there were multiple bombs in the Murrah Federal Building, and at least two explosions. But while Internet sites that offer viewing of these reports take a highly sensationalistic and conspiratorial "the government did it" stance, Gaffney frames his perceptions to coincide with his desire to topple Saddam Hussein. "There is evidence of Iraqi involvement in at least one and perhaps all three of most deadly terrorist attacks in the United States to date," he surmises. "To his credit," Gaffney adds, "Sen. Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Republican, stunned by the difficulty Miss Davis has had getting government agencies to address her findings, has recently promised an investigation into the matter."
By all means, we should investigate uncertainties regarding Oklahoma City. But if we reopen the case, we should do so in search of the truth, not in search of propaganda. Links between Al Qeada and Saddam Hussein have yet to be proven, no matter how hard Bush, Inc. and Frank Gaffney have tried. The temptation to stretch the truth may extend to Oklahoma City as well.
As Sen. Specter and Frank Gaffney lobby for the Oklahoma City case to be reopened, why stop there? Face it, if the study proving a second gunman fired at JFK could have somehow implicated Saddam Hussein, Gaffney would be clamoring to have pertinent information unlocked immediately.
Most importantly, why not use that same passion and determination to make certain families of September 11 victims get the answers they seek? Julia Sweeney, whose husband Brian was killed when his plane crashed into the World Trade Center, refused the $1.7 million "government buyout," so she could take legal action instead. "This is the only way I can get answers that I want," she told Phil Donahue. "There have been many things swept under the carpet. And I think it's a shame in a government that you trust - I think it's a shame, the things that they chose to tell you and the things they choose not to tell you."
Families Of Sept.11 spokesperson Stephen Push reacted to the news Congress would approve an independent investigation by saying he was cautiously optimistic. He told NPR he's uncomfortable President Bush will select the chairman of the investigative panel, but feels reassured Sen. John McCain will have input into one panel member. It's a travesty that these family members doubt anyone's commitment to the truth, least of all the president's.
Nobody need remind us we live in very strange times, but Arlen Specter's promise to further investigate the Oklahoma City bombing is especially surreal. In this brave new world, where the magic bullet meets McVeigh, few things are clear. It wasn't too long ago, remember, that we were told a terrorist's passport survived a fiery crash into the World Trade Center. When disgruntled soldiers hit the grassy knoll, one thing is certain: Truth will be hard to come by.
Homeland Insecurity
"In the next 5 to 10 years, we are all going to live in a global version of Nazi Germany." - David Icke
"Basically, all the conspiracy theories about secret societies wanting to take over the world are wrong." - Daniel Pipes
Anyone who's ever tuned into the History Channel's "Secret Societies" recognizes these quotes from its opening segment. As part of the "History's Mysteries" series, "Secret Societies" is a fun, often sensational journey inside the world of would-be cabals and plots for world domination. Featuring volleyed testimony from various experts, the program mixes factual information and historical trivia with open speculation on the role secret societies may have played in these events. "Do shadowy and clandestine groups really rule the world?" host Arthur Kent campily inquires, before hinting at hidden subtext behind historical moments.
During the 1980 presidential campaign, for example, the History Channel reports that Ronald Reagan repeatedly expressed a distrust of secret societies and promised that Skull and Bonesman, Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and Trilateral Commission alumni George Bush would not be offered a position in his administration. Yet during the Republican Convention, Reagan broke tradition by making a late-night dash from his hotel room to the convention floor and declaring George Bush his running mate. The Iran hostage situation was miraculously resolved the day Reagan was sworn in.
Ever since Prescott Bush was penalized for trading with the Nazis during World War II and the words "George Bush of the CIA" surfaced on a 1963 FBI report on the JFK assassination, the Bush family has been tied to speculation. And certainly, October Surprises and Iran/Contra add to the intrigue while links between the Bushes and the Hinkleys and Bushes and bin Ladens have not gone unnoticed. Regardless how entertaining this speculation may be, however, reasonable people have historically heard the word "conspiracy" and rejected theories outright - even those theories that later proved to be true. And given a choice between the conspiracy theorists and debunkers, they've tended to take the road less kooky.
In the History Channel-extracted exchange above, for example, CFR member Daniel Pipes clearly asserts the more sensible view. Serving on three editorial boards and working on four presidential campaigns, this author of CONSPIRACY: How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From once headed the Foreign Policy Research Institute, which is funded, in large part, by conspiracy-monger Richard Mellon Scaife. Pipes is also known for his latest endeavor, Campus Watch, (http//www.campuswatch.org) wherein he actively encourages "the paranoid style" by targeting professors who don't tow his politically correct line. Monitoring Middle East Studies professors, Pipes' group scours educators' work for bias and enlists students and academics who are "interested in promoting American interests on campus" to spy and tattle. A professor who is concerned about Dick Cheney's $73 million in business transactions with Iraq (even as sanctions continued to kill 5,000 Iraqi children monthly), for example, might be wise to keep his mouth shut, else possibly be listed on Pipes' website and become besieged with hate mail and death threats. What was Pipes saying about paranoia, again?
Now that debunkers like Pipes have been linked to plots to squelch dissent and Bush's official national security policy openly expresses a desire for dominance and control, is it any wonder conspiracy theories thrive? From the 2000 election to unanswered Sept. 11 questions to outright fabrications over Iraq, the president has repeatedly proven that he will lie shamelessly in order to garner more power for himself and his cronies. The shroud of secrecy under which the administration operates only serves to fuel speculation, while last minute GOP sneakiness, like the maneuvers that ballooned the 32 page Homeland Security Bill to nearly 500 pages virtually overnight, prove once again whose side theses folks are on.
One hastily added amendment to the Homeland Security bill, for example, which was rumored to have been added at the White House's request, is the provision under which pharmaceutical companies would be protected from lawsuits. Currently, 150 lawsuits have been filed against vaccine manufacturers, alleging that mercury preservatives within measles, mumps and rubella vaccines caused their children's autism (the New York Times recently dubbed this "the not-so-crackpot autism theory"). This amendment, which has nothing to do with Homeland Security, would limit compensation to $250,000. Paul Wellstone's amendment which would prevent companies who avoid paying US taxes by moving offshore from contracting with the Homeland Security Department was removed.
Even more sinister, however, is that new provisions reintroduce proposals which were previously rejected by most states in last years' Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MEHPA). Calling for mandatory vaccination, MEHPA allows for confiscation of real estate, food, medicine and other property; and outlines plans to herd afflicted citizens into stadiums. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson urged state legislatures to adopt the act, providing all the proof conspiracy theorists needed to prove that the U.S government was using 9/11 to impose a reign of tyranny. The mysterious deaths of 15 microbiologists following the attacks didn't help.
Yet according to the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons, under this Homeland Security provision, MEHPA would be all but reborn under section 304, subsection C of the bill. Tommy Thompson would be given sweeping powers to unilaterally declare an emergency and order forced vaccinations, detainment and quarantines. Bemoaning that the provision was "snuck into the bill at the last minute," Rep. Ron Paul (R, TX) said, "It is hard to think of a more blatant violation of liberty than allowing government officials to force people to receive potentially dangerous vaccines based on hypothetical risks."
Representative Paul also complained that Homeland Security Bill "expands the federal police state" and "gives the federal government new powers and increases federal expenditures," while media watchdog groups reported that other provisions added would make requests under the Freedom of Information Act easier to squelch. Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) said the disclosure rules represent "the most severe weakening of the Freedom of Information Act in its 36-year history," adding they had been inserted in the bill "behind closed doors." Sen. Robert Byrd also voiced concerns that the amendments would "give the president carte blanche to expand the culture of secrecy that now permeates this administration."
If passed, last minute changes to the bill would also give the federal government permission to monitor citizens' internet use, e-mail, travel plans, credit-card purchases and other personal data. Headed by John Poindexter, in the Information Awareness Office, Americans can rest assured that "bringing dignity to the White House" means hiring a five-time felon to keep an eye on them. The Information Awareness' logo, an all-seeing eye hovering atop a pyramid contains the slogan "Scientia Est Potentia" ("Knowledge Is Power") and is eerily similar to the illuminati symbol on the dollar - which fuels conspiracy theorists all the more.
"What people are going to see is going to make their hair curl," David Icke promised the History Channel. "What's been going on, in front of their face and behind their back, all their lives, while they thought a completely different story was unfolding."
After the latest example of stealth legislation designed to take away liberties under the guise of national security, our hair is already Shirley Temple tight. Provisions snuck into Homeland Security legislation make mockery of "the land of the free," and it's hopeful that the good Senators who still consider themselves public servants will apply the brakes to this legislation.
But the very fact that these provisions have been considered, and have already been snuck through the House, is troubling in itself. At the moment, conspiracy theorists seem far less extreme than those hell-bent on ruining the America we love. --11.18.02
The views expressed are the writer's own and do not necessarily reflect those of Bush Watch.
Like the wayfarer loves his wayward ways
Like the immigrant that I am loves America
And
the blind man the memory of his sighted days.
U.S.
installs Shah as dictator
b) Often wrongly evoked as the president's mandate to protect U.S. interests unilaterally and recklessly -- whether there is an immediate threat to our national security or not.
c) Devalued by those who would shamelessly sacrifice liberty, while disrespectfully referring to the Bill of Rights as a "suicide pact."
d) Deemed irrelevant by those who consider the framer's wisdom and vision antiquated, and feel that Congress need not declare war.
e) All of the above.
b) James Madison's remarks that "the executive is the branch of power most interested in war, and most prone to it."
c) Ben Franklin's statement that "even successful wars at length become misfortunes to those who unjustly commence them."
d) Thomas Jefferson's warning that, "When the government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny."
e) All of the above.
b) The passing of the 13th Amendment, which freed the slaves, the 14th Amendment, which guaranteed certain civil rights, and the 15th and 19th Amendments, which gave Blacks and women the right to vote.
c) The formation of the Department of Defense in 1947, after a lengthy deliberation process which included two years of Congressional hearings.
d) The passage of the PATRIOT Act and Homeland Security Act, both of which were steamrolled through the House and the Senate, without debate, and reduce government accountability, while expanding the federal police state.
e) All of the above.
c) Wants to reduce or eliminate judicial oversight, while increasing the government's power and authority.
d) May have been, as Center for Public Integrity Executive Director Chuck Lewis observed, "waiting for a war or something" to "pop this baby out and try to jam it through."
e) All of the above.
b) Government spokesperson Ari Fleischer has told Americans they need to watch what they say and watch what they do, as John Poindexter's Total Information Office becomes poised to do just that.
c) The neoconservative agenda of preemption and multiple-front wars has become America's official policy, as priests and other peace activists end up on "no-fly" lists.
d) 84% of Europeans now believe America is the greatest threat to world peace.
e) All of the above.
b) Testimony about Iraqi soldiers tossing babies out of incubators and a satellite photo showing soldiers amassed at Saudi Arabia's border. (Both lies helped to sell the Gulf War).
c) George W. Bush's references to an International Atomic Energy Agency report that Iraq is "six months away from developing a weapon" (a lie), his statement regarding unmanned Iraqi aircraft that could be used "for missions targeting the United States" (a lie), references to shipments of aluminum tubes to make nuclear weapons in Iraq (yet another lie), attempts to link Al Qeada to Saddam Hussein (refuted by the CIA, FBI and British intelligence).
d) Colin Powell's glowing citation of Tony Blair's (plagiarized and dated) Iraq dossier and his assertion that the Islamic terrorist group Ansar al-Islam is maintaining a "terrorist chemicals and poisons factory" in northeastern Iraq. (A lie).
e) All of the above.
b) Australia, where the majority overwhelmingly disagrees with this war and where the Senate issued an historic no-confidence vote against Prime Minister John Howard "for sending troops to a potential war without a proper explanation to the Australian people."
c) Other countries in "new Europe," whose citizens also largely oppose this war.
d) Israel.
e) All of the above.
b) Several veterans, retired military officers and many traditional conservatives.
c) Senior Pentagon officials who risk losing their jobs by speaking out.(As one White House source put it, "The President considers this nation to be at war, and, as such, considers any opposition to his policies to be no less than an act of treason.")
d) Three out of five U.N. Security Council members.
e) All of the above.
b) Involves U.N. troops occupying Iraq to insure that Saddam doesn't play cat and mouse games with inspectors.
c) Is welcomed by China, Belgium and Russia's Vladimir Putin, who, as the BBC reports, "is on a whirlwind tour of Europe to drum up opposition to a possible US-led attack on Iraq."
d) Has infuriated U.S. officials.
e) All of the above.
b) The Justice Department employee who leaked "the Domestic Security Act of 2003" at great personal risk.
c) Councilmen in a growing number of cities who have passed anti-war resolutions and have refused to comply with the U.S. PATRIOT Act.
d) Citizens partaking in antiwar demonstrations and other gloriously American forms of civil disobedience, such as those who've come up with their own version of the Boston tea party, http://www.nwtrcc.org/ .
e) All of the above.
Grateful Muslims Tap-Dance After An American Victory?
Is it Any Wonder Conspiracy Theories Thrive?