All of us knew it but couldn't prove it. Now we can prove it. Newly declassified documents published at the National Security Archive prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the Bush administration planned to topple Saddam Hussein and invade Iraq as early as January, 2001, and were making strategic plans and resource allocations as early as November, 2001.

January 30, 2001 – Bush administration principals (agency heads) meet for the
first time and discuss the Middle East, including Bush’s intention to disengage from the Israel-Palestine peace process and “How Iraq is destabilizing the region.” Bush directs Rumsfeld and JCS chairman Hugh Shelton to examine military options for Iraq; CIA director George Tenet is directed to improve intelligence on the country. Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill and counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke are both struck by the emphasis on confronting Iraq, an aim consistent with Rumsfeld’s hiring of Wolfowitz and later Feith, well known for their bellicosity on the issue, for high-level Pentagon
positions. (Source: EBB/Franks Timeline (PDF))

When did we invade Afghanistan? Oh, that's right...it was October 7, 2001.

Walking through these documents makes it clear that the Bush Administration -- from Day One -- intended to invade Iraq at some point in their reign of terror. Here is a memo (PDF) dated January 23, 2001 outlining the "Origins of the Iraq Regime Change Policy". This was requested by Vice President-elect Dick Cheney before taking office, presumably as a way to justify policy formation around aggressive US efforts for "regime change" in Iraq.

This memo (PDF) written on November 27, 2001 should send cold chills up and down your spine. It is a list of talking points from Rumsfeld to Franks about how to handle a run-up to a full-scale Iraq invasion. November 27th, 51 days after Afghanistan was invaded. And check this talking point:

enlarge

Continue reading »

On This Week with Christiane Amanpour, an interview with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. First of all, this is public diplomacy. Obviously, Clinton is only telling the truth as it suits the long-term Mideast strategy. For example, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has ignored the settlement moratorium for which she's praising him -- but hey, that's what diplomacy is: Resisting the urge to slap someone in the face and yell, "Liar!"

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Madam Secretary, thank you for joining us.

HILLARY CLINTON: It's a pleasure. Thank you for being here in Jerusalem.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: How are the talks going? Are you down beyond the sort of photo-op stage. Are you into core issues?

HILLARY CLINTON: We really are, Christiane. And I have to say, it's been impressive to see the two leaders engage so seriously so early on what are the core issues. But these talks are already into very sensitive and important areas.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: President Obama has said that given the talks going in a constructive way, Israel should continue the moratorium on settlements. Do you believe that that will happen?

HILLARY CLINTON: Well, that certainly is our hope. Now we've also said that we'll support an agreement that is reached between the parties. It took a lot of political capital for Prime Minister Netanyahu to achieve this moratorium. It had never been done before. And I, rightly I think, gave him credit for it about a year ago here in Jerusalem. At the same time, it's been in effect for the time that it was set for and the talks are just starting. So we are working hard to make sure there remains a conducive atmosphere to constructive thought.

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR: Is there any flexibility you can see, any creative diplomacy that anybody's talked about, to get through this hurdle?

HILLARY CLINTON: They need to keep talking. And each party-- both Israelis and Palestinians need to figure out a way to make that happen.

And I think this President has said, "We are committed. We will stay with you. We will do everything we can to facilitate that." At the end of the day this has to be an agreement between Israelis and Palestinians.

Continue reading »

TomDispatch" Andrew Bacevich, How Washington Rules

Emptywheel: Our Banana Republic

Above the Law: Supreme Court Clerk Hiring: Is it becoming more political?

The Big Picture: US Infrastructure Report Card: "D"

The Existentialist Cowboy: Gore Vidal: Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace

The Talking Dog: Transparency you can believe in

Paul Krugman: It's Witch-Hunt Season

As you might have noticed, Krugman is exceedingly anxious this days, and his column reflects it. After all, the Dems are about to get hit with a right-wing tsunami if the Republicans take control of the House, and yet, Obama's still trying to hit the ball down the Moderate Middle. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

I just can't imagine Hillary Clinton sitting back and letting the Republicans get away with this crap all over again. Can you?

So what will happen if, as expected, Republicans win control of the House? We already know part of the answer: Politico reports that they’re gearing up for a repeat performance of the 1990s, with a “wave of committee investigations” — several of them over supposed scandals that we already know are completely phony. We can expect the G.O.P. to play chicken over the federal budget, too; I’d put even odds on a 1995-type government shutdown sometime over the next couple of years.

It will be an ugly scene, and it will be dangerous, too. The 1990s were a time of peace and prosperity; this is a time of neither. In particular, we’re still suffering the after-effects of the worst economic crisis since the 1930s, and we can’t afford to have a federal government paralyzed by an opposition with no interest in helping the president govern. But that’s what we’re likely to get.

If I were President Obama, I’d be doing all I could to head off this prospect, offering some major new initiatives on the economic front in particular, if only to shake up the political dynamic. But my guess is that the president will continue to play it safe, all the way into catastrophe.

Miss USA, Rima Fakih, the first Arab-American to hold the title, competes in the Miss Universe pageant tonight. Her, ahem, costume, which (the LA times reports) does nothing for world hunger, is a tribute to President Obama's peace initiatives. The President is scheduled to watch a Sox game tonight.

UPDATE: John Amato

The new site design is up. There are plenty of new features that we'll explain a little bit later, but in a few weeks we'll be introducing our own C&L "Diary" section to the site. That means C&L readers will be able to upload your own embeddable videos and write your own posts. It should be quite entertaining and informative. Anyway....enjoy.

democracyarsenal.org

The editorial “Off Course in Iraq," published in the New York Times on July 20 was particularly disheartening. After being disillusioned about the invasion of Iraq and U.S. failures at efforts to reconstruct and bring peace to the country, I thought that at least my efforts working with Iraqi women in the new political system may prove to be a one bright spot in the otherwise dark and dangerous days of the post-Saddam era.

It seems now that even the hollow justification for the intervention in Iraq—to free people from the tyranny of Saddam Hussein, and in particular the women of Iraq—is just an excuse reminiscent of invading because of the Saddam’s nuclear arsenal. In question is the insertion of sharia law into the new constitution. Although there are supposed to be separate provisions depending on your religion, women would be stripped of their right to choose their own husbands, inherit property on the same basis as men and seek court protection if their husbands tire of them and decide to declare them divorced.

Wingnuttery Hall of Fame (So Far)   Sadly, No!

There've been tons of great suggestions for the Wingnuttery Hall of Fame so far. Let's take a look at the highlights...Continue reading "Wingnuttery Hall of Fame (So Far)"

well sir I believe THAT would be crossing the line into the realm of improbability        Fafblog!

Oh, this can't be true!

Spying on you at the library, indefinite detainment, torture, preventive wars on the wrong country, oh sure I can see that. ButRead on...

Rest in peace, Rue McClanahan. Open thread below...

Keith Olbermann/Voter Irregularities part V

Zogby Vs. Mitofsky

Warren Mitofsky seemed to disagree. “The exit polls have been better in the past. They were far from perfect, but nowhere near as bad as your broadcast made them sound.”

Zogby says he’s at peace with his own Election Night forecast - made not with the Mitofsky or Edison exit polling, but with his own polls.

Video

Whose Values?

Religion has been cited as a big factor in the recent presidential election. The exit polls found that 22 percent of voters cited "moral values" as the key to their vote. Of course, we welcome the "moral values" discussion in politics, but the question some Christians are raising is which values and whose values.

Sojourners: Christians for Justice and Peace has been receiving daily opportunities to shape the national debate and to make sure that social and economic justice is named as a "moral and religious value," and that war and peace are "life" issues too. The Reverend Jim Wallis is scheduled to speak about "moral values" this coming Sunday on "Meet the Press."

Only 51% of Americans have moral values?

Speak out about YOUR values....click here> My Moral Values

Is this Arafat's legacy?

I took a taxi cab ride in Philadelphia around 1999. I asked the driver to take me to get a cheese steak sandwich (of course) and he joined me saying he was hungry also. After a few minutes of small talk, he told me that he was Palestinian. I asked him, "Do you ever think there will be peace between Israel and Palestine?" He stopped eating and and said one word: Never! I asked him how come? " They kill babies in the streets! They threw my family out of their homes. How would you like it if someone came to the house that you lived in all of your life and kicked you into the streets?" After a few minutes I said, "Wouldn’t it be better for your people to finally make peace as long as it’s fair so that your families can heal and your society would begin to grow? He threw his sandwich to the ground and said, "There will never be peace! Never! "As long as we still breathe, we would all rather die!"

He was so angered that he took me back to the hotel and radioed in to his boss and told him that he couldn’t work the rest of the night.

At the time I was naive to the whole conflict and I thought I was asking an innocent question. I've heard that resentments are the number one offender in twelve step programs, and as this one goes, well… I’ve never felt hatred like I did talking to that man.

Will a new leadership help to create peace? With that type of resentment embeded in their hearts, I don't see it anytime soon.