Editor's note: Whowhatwhy.com is one of the best investigative journalism sites we have, and here's a roundup of this week's big stories:

Et Tu, Karzai? Afghanistan Violates US Iran Sanctions
by Nick Schwellenbach on Jan 30, 2013
What happens when your pliable client state, desperate for economic rejuvenation, loses access to one of its biggest regional oil suppliers whom you vehemently dislike? Welcome to the current position of the U.S. government.

Can a Small Community Throw a Monkey Wrench into the Global Fracking Machine?
by Karen Charman on Jan 29, 2013
As featured on ProRev.com, we report on hopeful developments in the fight of local democracy against transnational resource exploitation interests in upstate New York. So what's the best way of defeating entrenched, powerful interests like the oil and natural gas industries? Turn the power of the state against them, one township at a time.

Explainer: Fiscal Cliff's Secret Gifts To Corporations
by Russ Baker on Jan 27, 2013
The fiscal crisis offers ample opportunities for finger-pointing. Let's be sure we're not using it simply to advance an agenda, and try to keep our eye on who (almost) always gets their way.

From The Algerian Terror To Al Qaeda Meets Mali: West's Hidden Agenda And One Big Mess
By Victor Kotsev on Jan 25, 2013
Trying to understand the story of the Algerian hostage crisis? French (and soon US) intervention in neighboring Mali creeping onto your radar? A trip through some baffling landscape reveals some familiar landmarks.

RERUN: To Finagle Chuck Hagel?
by Christian Stork on Jan 7, 2013
With his enemies and supporters gearing up for one hell of a fight, Chuck Hagel's confirmation hearing set for Thursday, January 31 will provide for some interesting exposes into what exactly Washington's powerful consider to be acceptable ideas. Here's a gem from the archives laying out what's at stake in the confirmation-both for the man and the country.

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:

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

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.

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

(h/t ThinkProgress)

The Dalai Lama once said

When we feel love and kindness toward others, it not only makes others feel loved and cared for, but it helps us also to develop inner happiness and peace.

I wrote that on a little card that stays on my desk as a reminder when I start stressing too much over the bobbleheads and politicos who forget that their games affect real people. I admit I'm not always successful in finding love and kindness in my heart. Especially for someone like Glenn Beck, who seems to want to instigate violence. Van Jones has even more reason to not find love or kindness towards Beck. After all, it was Beck who led the charge to get Jones out of the White House. But if you think that Van Jones is going to give Beck the satisfaction of being nasty, you got another think coming:

Despite the best efforts of Glenn Beck to ruin Van Jones, Jones is back, standing tall, a righteous man vindicated.

While receiving a prestigious award Friday night from the NAACP, Jones refused to lower himself to Beck’s level. Rather than giving Beck the tongue lashing he so richly deserved; Jones rose above the ugly, divisive, mean spirited little man that is Glenn Beck.

Rather than scorn, Jones instead offered Beck a message of love, and the country a message of hope and unity:

Last thing I want to say is this: To my fellow countryman, Mr. Glenn Beck. I see you, and I love you, brother. I love you, and you cannot do anything about it. I love you, and you cannot do anything about it. Let’s be one country! Let’s be one country! Let’s get the job done!

With that short, brief, powerful message of love and redemption, hope and promise, Jones destroyed Beck. The contrast could not be stronger: Beck is a petty and vicious snake in the grass, a vile serpent, a vessel of rumor, innuendo, and evil; while Jones is a hero, maligned but resolute, rising above Beck and the filth of the right wing smear machine.

Some times, the best revenge is turning the other cheek.

darkblack: 5 Is The Magic Number

Faithful Progressive : George Lakoff on Obama, Tea Parties, and the battle for our brains

The Rude Pundit: What is enhanced interrogation tecnique number 12?

MAL Contends: Gates calls Europe's anti-war mood a danger to peace

James Wolcott: The lunatics have taken over the salon

Newshoggers: Joseph Stack, frustrated American

I'm one of the knitters who contributed to the "Radical Act of Knitting in honor of Mother's Day" organized by CODEPINK.

Open Thread below...