Scandal!!! Conspiracy!!!!

[H2O Man]

I posted this general information on robertpaulson's recent thread which discussed a Raw Story report regarding the possible attempt to plant WMD in Iraq. I thought that this was one of the most interesting threads I have read on DU in some time, and had hoped my post would generate some interest. However, after I posted (#120), the discussion on the thread stopped, and I think this may be interesting enough that I will post it again.

A few weeks ago, I had recommended that DUers interested in another perspective on the US role in the Middle East read "Washington Report (on Middle East Affairs)." It is published by the American Educational Trust (AET), a non-profit foundation created by retired US foreign service officers. People are free to copy and reprint articles without charge, so long as they are given proper attribution.

Their website can be found at: http://www.wrmea.com

The current (Jan/Feb '06) has a number of LTTE, articles, and editorial information that most DUers would find surprisingly familiar. Peter Valenti examines important questions regarding a "free press" in "Al-Jazeera in the Crosshairs: The Arab Media Scrutinizes the Bush-Blair Memo." Lucy Jones, from London, writes an article advocating that the British take a much closer look at the Downing Street Memo. And Faisal Kutty writes a fascinating article on an American Conscientious Objector winning the right to appeal a Refugee Board ruling -- something every young man in the USA should be reading.

The magazine also has an article, "Will Syria Be Next?" by Rachelle Marshall, a member of the Jewish International Peace Union. Everyone familiar with Rachelle's writing knows that it cannot be boxed into a simplistic "Israeli-Palestinian" context. This is, for example, an article that every American concerned with the reckless aggression of the neocons in the Bush administration should read.

I was particularly interested in a LTTE on page 6 ("Coincidence or Not?") which examines the unhealthy influence that AIPAC has on the US Senate. This should be as of much, or far more, concern to us as Jack Abramoff's criminal activities. Much of the same material is also covered on the "Publisher's Page" on page 82. This article looks closely at some of the curious things that George Bush has recently said, and shows why he has lied us into war in Iraq. Again, no great surprise to DUers, but well worth reading.

The article of greatest interest to me is by Andrew Killgore, the former US ambassador to Qatar. On pages 12-13, his "FBI Investigation of AIPAC ...." connects the neocon spy/AIPAC scandal with the Plame conspiracy. Though the corporate media continues to largely ignore Larry Franklin's pleading guilty, and former AIPAC top-guns Rosen and Weissman's trial (which began this month), Killgore notes that it will likely result in Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby, and Perle being called to testify. This could blow the lid off the criminal activities these weasals engaged in, in order to lead our country into the war in Iraq.

I hope DUers will take some time to read the information that is available, from Washington Report to Raw Story to TruthOut .... and, yes, some of the valuable threads on DU. Connect the dots, and spread the word.

[niallmac]

1. The story of influence amongs our 'representatives' is legend though

I would fall off my chair if I ever saw the letters AIPAC in a main stream media news article.

[H2O Man]

5. Andrew Killgore

was one of the seven people who sued the Federal Elections Commission in 1989 for failing to require AIPAC to publish details of its income and expenditures. It seems reasonable to me: just like with Jack Abramoff, it seems we should know who is buying the services of congressmen and senators, and affecting US policy -- both domestiic and foreign.

"The complainants were James A. Akins, former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia; George W. Ball, former secretary of state ...; Richard Curtis, former chief inspector of the US Information Agency and executive editor of this magazine; Paul Findley, former Republican congressman from Illinois; former Admiral Robert Hanks; (Killgore); and Orin Parker, former president of the American-Middle East Educational and Training Services...The complainants asserted that AIPAC was a political committee and, like others, should be required to publish its financial activities."

The US District Court for DC ruled in favor of AIPAC; the Court of Appeals ruled in our favor; AIPAC took the case to the US Supreme Court, which "dodged the issue by accepting AIPAC's argument that, as a 'membership organization,' it did not have to publish its finances. The Supreme Court sent the case back down to the original US District Court.

"Our position is that AIPAC may be a membership organization, but it is also a political committee, and thus liable to open up its finances. The case is currently in limbo in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, where -- in 'court time' -- it again will be tried. If it folows the course of the first trial, it eventually will reach the Supreme Court again."

This would seem a good reason for us -- the grass roots people who want a democratic nation that respects the US Constitution, including the separation of federal powers -- should be VERY ACTIVE in the opposition to the current Supreme Court nominee.

[Mme. Defarge]

38. Wow!

Thanks for this info. Back in the '70's, I was taking a course in international business, and James Aikns was a guest lecturer. This was when he was no longer Ambassador to Saudi Arabia. I believe Carter was President. Anyway, the gist of his comments were about the massive corruption associated with U.S. Saudi relations. It was a large lecture hall, and everyone was spellbound. During Q & A, someone asked how/when things would be cleaned up, and he answered, "When we have a man of honor at the top." I remember being surprised at this, which is why I think that Carter was President, who I thought was squeaky clean.

Well, so much for a trip down memory lane.

[JDPriestly]

2. Thank you.

It's a problem at DU that some of the best threads are the shortest and the least read. Your heading tells why. To be a long and frequently read, a thread has to invite comments. Threads about scandals and big news stories are easy to react to, so they get a lot of comments. More thoughtful, complex threads or threads that link to non-DU sources are read but don't attract comments so they kind of disappear. Most DUers don't spend all day at the computer reviewing DU posts so we miss some important posts. It's a shame but that's the way it is. Thanks for posting this again.

[H2O Man]

6. I kind of thought

that heading would get folks' attention. Though it was in mildly bad taste, I opted for it.

I agree with your points on how many of the better threads are overlooked. It's a shame, because there is a wealth of information on this site.

[im10ashus]

22. It's indicative of our time.

Get them with the headline. We (myself sometimes included) are a sound-bite nation. Short attention spans with no time for action. That must change if we want to find the truths in life. There are certain people who post here that I take the time to find and read their threads. Yours is one. Thanks for this thread. Like most of your others, I am kicking and nominating. Let freedom ring.

[lumpy]

42. Thanks for posting this.

Some good ones we miss, or are gone before we know it. I love the painting with your post. The rendering and colors are beautiful. Artist?

[H2O Man]

43. A friend of mine

who I had known since we were kids, who died two years ago, did the picture.

[omega minimo]

16. Xlent description of why "GD" + "GD/Chat" could improve flow and relevance

on DU. Skinner's recent announcement this was under consideration drew lots of comment......................and went away.............................

He had said that "GD/Politics" was created to focus threads after Nov. 2004. At the time he announced this (for feedback) GD was in a particularly crude/fluffy upswing in its cycle.

Substantive GD posts were to be forumed with GD: Politics; GD:Chat could run amok :P and sensationalize and trivialize til doomsday; the dampening effect you describe would be lessened.

:hi: Happy New Year!! :toast:

edit: "run amok"? Actually, the work for the Mods was one of the considerations and may be one reason the change hasn't occurred. Seems like the big filter effect of reorganizing this way would somewhat self-select and help them do their job.

[G_j]

3. amazing reading

much thanks

..& I had no idea Rosen and Weissman's trial was underway.
:shrug:

[H2O Man]

7. I think that

it was scheduled to start last week. I suspect that it is still the early phase, but it should be on the front pages of every serious newspaper in the country. Perhaps if an organized effort by DUers was to begin an effort to call attention to the case, we could at least get it on the back pages.

[JohnyCanuck]

9. it should be on the front pages of every serious newspaper in the country.

Don't hold your breath waiting. You'll be turning mighty blue in the face.

[H2O Man]

10. I believe that there

is a serious amount of pressure being put on the two AIPAC officials, to get them to make a deal to avoid a trial .... because a trial would reveal things that would have our neocon fiends turning red and blue.

We can, of course, get the case to be covered by way of LTTE.

http://www.franklingate.com/

[Catrina]

26. The trial appears to have been postponed until April

according to this article ~

Indicted Officials Consider Suing Pro-Israel Lobby
Bad Blood Spills Over In Aipac Spy Scandal
By ORI NIR
December 23, 2005

....

The hostility between the two dismissed officials and Aipac's leadership is expected to peak at the two men's trial, scheduled to start in late April 2006. Defense attorneys will try to establish that the men were following the organization's routine practice and that Aipac's top officials were fully aware of their actions. "The evidence in this case will show that Dr. Rosen and Mr. Weissman always acted in Aipac's interests, never were on their own and acted with the knowledge and approval of their superiors," Rosen's lawyer, Abbe Lowell, told the Forward.

.....

The quarrel over paying Rosen's and Weissman's legal fees is the latest manifestation of this escalating adversarial relationship, although it is not clear whether bad blood was the reason Aipac first halted the lawyers' fees last spring.

What is clear is that the two sides' conflicting arguments regarding the lobby's routine working norms are likely to collide in court. Defense attorneys are expected to argue that receiving information from administration officials was something the two were paid and encouraged to do, and something Aipac routinely does — as do many other lobbying groups in Washington. Aipac is expected to try to portray the actions of the two as contradictory to Aipac's norms and conduct.

.....

Since Rosen and Weissman were fired, their lawyers have been exploring defense strategies, many of which could be damaging to Aipac. Attorneys for the two are exploring Aipac's legal responsibility for informing employees what the law says regarding the handling of sensitive information. Rosen and Weissman maintain that they had no idea that receiving information from administration officials could be illegal, said sources close to the defense. The two argue that the organization should have alerted them that such a possibility exists, the sources said.

http://www.forward.com/articles/7052

What's really interesting about this case is that both Weissman and Rosen claim that they were not spying because getting information from Administration officials was what they were supposed to do, and they claim it was so easy that there was no need to spy.

I am paraphrasing this, but I've read that elsewhere also, that this was not a spy case because government officials permitted the information to be disseminated. Apparently the FBI doesn't agree. But if that turns out to be true then our current government is working for who? That may be the question no wants to see an answer to.

The other very interesting fact revealed in this article is how much money AIPAC has raised since this case began. It is mind-boggling and raises the question 'who is behind AIPAC, and why can the American people not see a list of donors to this organization?

Anyway, it appears the trial was postponed until April. I agree with H2O Man. There must be huge pressure on Rosen and Weissman to plead guilty and avoid a trial. But if they really believe they are innocent, and received their instructions from AIPAC, why should they do that?

[G_j]

27. good idea

very important

A real journalist would have a wealth of incredible material these days.

[KoKo]

4. Thanks! will check this out.....

:kick:

[H2O Man]

8. I think you

will really appreciate their web site. They've been around for 25 years, but are not well known to the democratic left. Perhaps they will be soon.

[Me.]

11. WR Is An Excellent Source

It speaks to how thoroughly we have been invaded by “special interests”. Stupefying how a small group could so absolutely take over our government. Of course they had help from those like Miss Run Amok Miller, she who had her fingers in the Plame affair and is the unidentified woman in the AIPAC scandal. I am assuning she will be called to testify but will she also be called out for all her nefarious deeds? It still hasn’t been explained why she alerted a Muslim “cdharity” that the FBI was on the way nor has her connection with Dr. David Kelly received the attention it should.

The neo influence in this country has been pervasive. A very knowledgeable Duer sent me a link to a site which shows how well organosed they are in a very under the radar way. If you read their purpose you see how well organized they are, quite like the fundie network is.

http://www.factsandlogic.org/


I also wonder what the end of the Sharon era will do to the neos and their plans, as he was B*** and their partner in the ME. I am curious as to where the plans for invading Iran stand now.

As for Syria, it was very clear on the RP thread that they have long set their sights on Syria and the man who focused on that country was Wurmser. I would like to know what is happening with him. Back when the Plame discussion was hot it became evident that he was one of the two men FitzG. Was squeezing. Any clue as to his standing today? Is he still connected to the state department. Also, he was originally at state under Bolton who so far has escaped any scrutiny with all of this. Will he be caught up in any of the investigations?

[Catrina]

18. Judith Miller was also involved in the AIPAC spy case?

I did not realize that. I thought she was also thought to be the 'unnamed female' in the Forged Niger Documents' case, who was in Rome with the neocons when the documents surfaced, although I do not remember the details or even if I am confusing that with this case.

But if she WAS involved in the Pentagon spy case, then that makes it even more interesting that she left jail after Scooter's letter told her 'The Aspens are Turning'.

Now I will definitely have to check out the dates on this, but it makes the timing of Libby's cryptic message to her and her subsequent decision to leave jail, even more interesting, because
as I said in another post, both those events happened RIGHT AFTER Larry Franklin pled guilty to spying and it was revealed that he had been wired when meeting with Rosen and Weissman.

Very, very interesting ~ all the threads do seem to be coming together, bit by bit, through all the scandals, and the same names keep popping up, Judith Miller's being one of them.

[Me.]

20. Miss Run Amok

Judith Miller is Unnamed Woman in AIPAC Spy Ring Indictment

“Judith Miller is a reporter for the New York Times. She has a long string of discredited articles that helped lead us into war in Iraq. Her actions leave question at to whether she is a Journalist or an Agent of Influence for the Likud Party. Has Judith Miller sold out her Journalistic Integrity? Or even worse has Judith Miller sold out her Country?

It has come to my attention that the DOJ is asking questions about the links between Michael Maloof and Judith Miller of the New York Times. Maloof is a shadowy character who worked at the pentagon for the Cabal. Miller a reporter at the New York times worked hand in glove with a shameful cast of spies, agents of Influence, and men with dual loyalties including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, Bill Luti, and Paul Wolfowitz.

Judy Miller was very much a part of the pre-war opperation that has led to more than 1000 American deaths in Iraq and continues to increase every day. Mossad fabrictaed information and used a number of sources including Ahmad Chalabi to disseminate the information. Suspected spies Michael Maloof and Larry Franklin working for Bill Luti and suspected spy Douglas J. Feith would then "stovepipe" the information to the White House. The same information would be disseminated by Judith Miller on the pages of the New York Times to make the disinformation look real. When you have Defense Department intelligence corroborated by the New York Times it looks very convincing especially when our ally Israel was confirming the stories.’ Cont…

http://www.sw-asia.com/People/IRI997.htm


Judith Miller: Just Another Cog in the Neocon Propaganda Machine
Wed Jul 13, 2005

“An older leak clue? This passage from an excellent Frank Foer piece on Judith Miller in New York magazine really kind of jumps out at me:

Iraq coverage didn’t just depend on Chalabi. It also relied heavily on his patrons in the Pentagon. Some of these sources, like Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz, would occasionally talk to her on the record. She relied especially heavily on the Office of Special Plans, an intelligence unit established beneath Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith. The office was charged with uncovering evidence of Al Qaeda links to Saddam Hussein that the CIA might have missed. In particular, Miller is said to have depended on a controversial neocon in Feith’s office named Michael Maloof. At one point, in December 2001, Maloof’s security clearance was revoked. In April, Risen reported in the Times, “Several intelligence professionals say he came under scrutiny because of suspicions that he had leaked classified information in the past to the news media, a charge that Mr. Maloof denies.”

Jump out at you too? December 2001 happens to be the time period that Judith Miller apparently tipped off the Holy Land Foundation and associated Muslim charities that their offices were about to be raided by federal investigators. Seems Mr. Maloof might be a candidate for being the suspected leaker. But why would he have done this? Was he just trying to convey a hot tip to a reporter who had been following the two year probe of the charities' alleged connections to suspected terrorists already? Or was it designed to trip up the investigation itself? And if so, why?

Update: And why has Maloof been on "special detail" to the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy until August 2004, three years after his security clearance was revoked?”cont…

http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/07-13-05/discussion.cgi.8.html

[Catrina]

24. Wow! So is that when Patrick Fitzgerald met Judith Miller

before? I read that he had a previous, contentious relationship with her when she supposedly blew a case the FBI was workiing on.

Judith Miller's connection to Dr. Kelly is also very curious. If she had nothing to hide in that case, why not, after his tragic death, reveal when she wrote about it, that they were friends, and that she was the last person he wrote to before is 'suicide'? It was Dr. Kelly's family who released the email. I wonder why they did that?


This woman needs to be questioned, under oath and intensively, imo. And if the NYT wants to regain its credibility, it is they who should investigate her and her various, suspicious connections.

Good question indeed, why was Maloof not simply fired after his security clearance was revoked?

[Me.]

29. That Was It

At the time FitzG. subpoenaed the phone records for the NYT but was stopped by the courts so the case went nowhere. Miss Girl would later point to this incident and use it to back up her claim that he was out of control.

As for the defendants in AIPAC being pressured to plead guilty, I'm sure the heat is on. The problem there is that two men know the guys who want them to plead, they were one of them. It's easy for others to try and persuade the two to accept long jail terms. It's working real well in the Abramoff case. i'm wondering if Newt is going to be implicated in that situation. He along with several others intimately involved with the plan for a new American century have been practically invisible.

[Straight Shooter]

12. I did not realize membership orgs and PACs were mutually exclusive.

I wonder who the general counsel of AIPAC is, and in what manner she/he/they are tied to bush/neocons/Abramoff. These people are thick as thieves. A flow chart of their entire network would boggle the mind. I'm afraid most Americans are too daunted by the complexity and just shrug and say, "Well, they're all corrupt," and go back to watching ESPN or the Shopping Network.

Beautiful painting, BTW. Intriguing use of darkness within the turquoise rectangles; they resemble eyes peering out.

[No Exit]

13. AIPAC officials' trial began this month??

Wow, thanks. What with all the other scandals, I hadn't realized that. I hope someone (maybe some bloggers) will cover it if/when Wolfowitz, Feith, Libby, and/or Perle are called as witnesses!

[Al-CIAda]

14. Poll: Should AIPAC Register as the Agent of a Foreign Government?

The Question: A tax-exempt organization that lobbies Congress on behalf of Israel, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (also known as AIPAC), has been under investigation by the FBI for allegedly receiving classified information from a Pentagon official and using this information on behalf of the government of Israel. In view of this investigation, do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree that AIPAC should be asked to register as an agent of a foreign government and lose its tax-exempt status?


http://www.cnionline.org/learn/polls/aipac/

[H2O Man]

21. Great!

Thanks for that.

[Catrina]

28. At this point in time, that seems to depend

on whether Rosen and Weissman are telling the truth. I have just read through several links here, and elsewhere on the Pentagon spy case.

According to Rosen and Weissman, it seems that what they are saying is that you can't be spying on someone is willingly giving you information. Larry Franklin may be the key, rather than those two, as to whether anyone needed to spy on the Bush administration.

If the Bush administration wanted to send this information to Israel in order to help get their war in Iraq going, then is it spying for a foreign nation, or doing the work of the current US government?

If it is the latter, then Rosen, Weissman and Larry Franklin were simply doing what the US government were asking them to do.

I thought at first that the reason for the covering up by the media of this case was to protect AIPAC. But the more I read the more I think it is to cover for this administration ~ then the question is ~ can this government be brought up on charges for this, were they working in collusion with Israel and other foreign nations, (Britain and Italy, eg) in order to deceive the American people into a war that was unnecessary?

If that turns out to be the case, then Rosen and Weissman might make a deal to be witnesses against officials of the US government, imo. This gets more and more interesting, but I'm leaniing towards the possibility that Rosen and Weissman may be telling the truth in this instance. That they really did not believe they were spying, just doing their job, as asked.

[Nikki Stone 1]

41. I agree with your assessment. I believe that neocon collusion is present

This was an extremely interesting thread.

[Catrina]

15. Larry Franklin was

very close to Douglas Feith, I have read.

An interesting thing happened regarding Larry Franklin as I recall. When his guilty plea was announced, right after that, Judith Miller, after receiving Libby's 'the aspens are turning' letter, decided to cooperate with the prosecutor. I'm not sure of the dates, iow, whether Larry Franklin's plea was right before the date on Libby's letter, but the two events, Judy leaving jail and Franklin's plea were very close together.

Aside from these two interesting facts, there is another that often is ignored regarding Larry Franklin. He was one of the 20 or so individuals summoned to Rome by Michael Ledeen and who met at the same time that the Forged Documents surfaced.

H2O Man, I know the Rosen/Weissman trial was supposed to start in January, but I read recently that it would start in April and was surprised. I have not heard anything about it, anywhere because the Media will not cover this story.

So what we do know about Larry Franklin is that he was very close to Feith and his OSP. He was in Rome when the Forged documents surfaced and Judith Miller left jail on the advice of Libby after Larry Franklin pled guilty.

I agree with you that the Pentagon spy case is connected to the Valerie Plame case somehow.

Another article I read recently was that both Rosen and Weissman are thinking of filing a lawsuit against AIPAC because AIPAC has stopped paying their legal fees. The article claimed that AIPAC wanted to distance itself from them (although they have claimed they did nothing wrong and were 'just reporters' doing their job) until they are either found guilty or innocent. AIPAC's offices were raided by the FBI and that story did appear on CNN once, but since then, this story has all but been forgotten in the MSM.

[H2O Man]

23. I think the link

on post #10 has information on the fellows considering suing AIPAC. I am under the impression that this is a reaction to the pressure for the two to plead guilty and go to jail without creating a scene.

If I understand things correctly, the attorneys were going to be filing motions this month. The actual testimony etc may come in the spring. The same link (on #10) should connect to some of the motions being filed.

I appreciate the fact stories have a short shelf life these days, but when I look at how little is reported on this case, I'm reminded of John Lennon's saying that a conspiracy of silence speaks louder than words. I think DU should be lobbying with CountDown or Hardball to cover this aspect of the Iraqi war scandals.

[robertpaulsen]

57. Judy leaves jail & Franklin's plea announced on Sept. 29, 2005

Larry Franklin to plead!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=4929350

NY Times reporter Judith Miller released from jail
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/NY_Times_reporter_Judith_Miller_released_0929.html

Must be another one of those "coincidences".
:sarcasm:

[Catrina]

82. 'Out West, where you vacation, the Aspens will be turning! They turn in

clusters, because their roots connect them'!!

I'm not sure that's accurate, but that cryptic message in Libby's letter to Judith Miller while she was in jail, telling her to 'come back to work, and to life' seemed like code of some sort at the time. Now, I am certain it was.

The reason no one connected it to Larry Franklin's guilty plea was because that story was not being reported in the MSM and slipped by most people.

What was so puzzling about Libby's decision to release her from her position of not disclosing her source after so long, was not being able to connect it to anything at the time.

But, and this is just MY theory, the Larry Franklin plea must have sent chills through the neocons, now that we are more aware of the claims by Rosen and Weissman, that they were not spying, but merely conducting business as usual for AIPAC (and the neocons?) funneling whatever information was necessary to those who were most interested in creating mayhem in the ME in this case, Israel.

Once Franklin decided to cooperate, and Rosen and Weissman let it be known they were not going to quietly go to jail, pretending they were spies, Cheney, Feith, Libby, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld all of them, might eventually be exposed for the deceptive, operatives they are.

There was no point in Judy Miller protecting Libby anymore, because someone else would eventually cave, as Franklin had, and perhaps, as prosecutors in that case, and in the Valerie Plame affair, put pressure on more and more of the players.

As has already been said, AIPAC and the PNACers appear to have been working hand in hand to achieve the neocon dream of 'restructuring the entire ME'.

Was Franklin an 'Aspen'? And if so, who made up the 'cluster' that Libby seemed to think was 'turning'? Rosen and Weissman have not pled guilty. Bad for the neocons since their testimony will be that they were following orders from top government officials in Bush's administration, funneled through AIPAC.

And in the Valerie Plame investigation, we know that Fitzpatrick had 'turned' Wurmser and Hannah early on with threats of jail.

The one thing I am not sure of though. Larry Franklin entered his plea a day or so before Judith Miller received Libby's letter. That was near the end of July. She left jail on the 30th. But I remember that Libby's letter was dated around the 15th. Could he have known that Larry Franklin was going to enter a guilty plea? Maybe through the lawyers ~

This should be a very interesting year ~ thanks for the links. I will check the date of Libby's letter when I get a chance.

[Clara T]

17. kick for info

please post a link to robert paulsen's original thread

rec'd

[Al-CIAda]

19. Link to thread-

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x60048

[im10ashus]

25. I just read Rachelle Marshall's article.

This is something:

**snip**

There are currently 10,000 Iraqis in U.S. military prisons, most of them innocent of any crime.

**snip**

Dozens of Iraqi journalists have been arrested while on the job and detained for months, with no reason given.

**snip**

The Bush administration is accusing Syria of allowing foreign fighters to pass into Iraq, and is carrying out covert military operations inside Syria, but according to the CSIS, all but a few of the insurgents are Iraqis.

It's a hornet's nest there and this administration is still carrying out covert military operations. When will the madness of King George end?

[robertpaulsen]

30. Kicked, bookmarked, recommended!

Thanks for keeping this issue at the forefront of discussion here, H2O Man. I'm celebrating my birthday today, so I won't have much time online, but I'll be back tomorrow, hopefully with more dots to connect.

'Til then, let's keep this at the top!

:kick:

[H2O Man]

31. I certainly hope

that, under the circumstance, you are listening to "Birthday" from the White Album.

[robertpaulsen]

58. How'd you know? You must be tapping my phone for the NSA!

:rofl:

Actually, my best man gave me an original issue of John Lennon's Plastic Ono Band album. I'm sure you know how good an album it is. ;)

When my wife brought the cake out, everyone did sing "Birthday". It was a great day.

[Me.]

32. HB RP!

many happy more

[im10ashus]

33. Happy B-day!!!

:toast:

[Octafish]

35. Happy Birthday, robertpaulsen!

Thanks for all you've done to make ours a better world.

[Octafish]

34. Them or Us: AIPAC on Trial

More on the subject:

Them or Us

AIPAC on Trial

By JAMES PETRAS

In August 2004, the FBI and the US Justice Department counter-intelligence bureau announced that they were investigating a top Pentagon analyst suspected of spying for Israel and handing over highly confidential documents on US policy toward Iran to AIPAC which in turn handed them over to the Israeli Embassy. The FBI had been covertly investigating senior Pentagon analyst, Larry Franklin and AIPAC leaders, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman for several years prior to their indictment for spying. On August 29, 2005 the Israeli Embassy predictably hotly denied the spy allegation. On the same day Larry Franklin was publicly named as a spy suspect. Franklin worked closely with Michael Ledeen and Douglas Feith, then Undersecretary for Defense in the Pentagon, in fabricating the case for war with Iraq. Franklin was the senior analyst on Iran, which is at the top of AIPAC's list of targets for war.

As the investigation proceeded toward formal charges of espionage, the pro-Israeli think tanks and neo-con ideologues joined in a two-prong response. On the one hand some questioned whether "handing over documents" was a crime at all, claiming it involved "routine exchanges of ideas" and lobbying. On the other hand, Israeli officials and media denied any Israeli connection with Franklin, minimizing his importance in policy-making circles, while others vouched for his integrity.

The FBI investigation of the Washington spy network deepened and included the interrogation of two senior members of Feith's Office of Special Plans, William Luti and Harold Rhode. The OSP was responsible for feeding bogus intelligence leading to the US attack of Iraq. The leading FBI investigator, Dave Szady, stated that the FBI investigation involved wiretaps, undercover surveillance and photography that document the passing of classified information from Franklin to the men at AIPAC and on to the Israelis.

The Franklin-AIPAC-Israeli investigation was more than a spy case. It involved the future of US-Middle East relations and more specifically whether the '",neo-cons' would be able to push the US into a military confrontation with Iran. Franklin was a top Pentagon analyst on Iran, with access to all the executive branch deliberations on Iran. AIPAC lobbying and information gathering was aggressively directed toward pushing the Israeli agenda on a US-Iranian confrontation against strong opposition in the State Department, CIA, military intelligence and field commanders.

Franklin's arrest on May 4, 2005 and the subsequent arrest of AIPAC foreign policy research director Steve Rosen and Iran specialist and deputy director for foreign policy, Keith Weissman on August 4, 2005 was a direct blow to the Israeli-AIPAC war agenda for the US. The FBI investigation proceeded with caution accumulating detailed intelligence over several years. Prudence was dictated by the tremendous political influence that AIPAC and its allies among the Conference of the Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations wield in Congress, the media and among Fundamentalist Christians and which could be brought to bear when the accused spies were brought to trial.

http://www.counterpunch.org/petras01072006.html

As always, great post and thread, H20 Man. Thank you.

[H2O Man]

36. Good article!

This is one of the most significant battles, legal or otherwise, that our country has faced. It is important for DUers to help spread the word about it. The corporate edia is not avoiding coverage because it is too complex or too difficult for the general public to understand -- just the opposite: this is something that everyone can understand, and something that the vast majority of Americans recognizes as a threat to our sovereignty.

[Me.]

40. As Sharon Was So Pivotal To The ME Plan

where does the current situation leave them? B*** needed Sharon. Now with the country in chaos there can be no, at least in the immediate future, strike on Iran by Israel with us in the background waiting to step in and help our "ally" out.

[Catrina]

37. Yes, thank you H2O Man, this is an important subject

Franklin's arrest on May 4, 2005 and the subsequent arrest of AIPAC foreign policy research director Steve Rosen and Iran specialist and deputy director for foreign policy, Keith Weissman on August 4, 2005 was a direct blow to the Israeli-AIPAC war agenda for the US.

This is good news. I know many people have been concerned about this country following the PNAC agenda, and going into Iran and Syria.

It is sickening to think that this small band of rogues are directing this country into wars that kill so many for their own personal reasons, and that this country is simply the pocket book for them, and provides the troops.

The FBI investigation proceeded with caution accumulating detailed intelligence over several years. Prudence was dictated by the tremendous political influence that AIPAC and its allies among the Conference of the Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations wield in Congress, the media and among Fundamentalist Christians and which could be brought to bear when the accused spies were brought to trial.

Unreal! That the truth no longer matters, that this government is so up for grabs that every election is now determined by the highest bidder??

In the article I posted above, (forgot to check the post #) it is reported that AIPAC received more money since this spy case last year than ever before.

What truly gets to me as I learn more about these various cabals is how they simply dismiss the American people. Do they really think we are that dumb?

Well, maybe the answer is 'no' they do not. That is why they have gone to such trouble to buy up the media, and to silence anyone who talks about this. Which means they KNOW they are doing wrong!

I hope this case goes to trial ~ we need a public airing of the crimes and treasonous acts that have been going on for far too long, imo.

:kick: and recommended. Very important story!

[Me.]

39. In Response To An Earlier Question

There is this from the article:

"Facing up to 10 years in federal prison, up against detailed, well-documented federal charges based on wiretaps, videos and the testimony of self-confessed spy and Pentagon contact Franklin, fired and denounced by their former colleagues and current leaders of AIPAC, Rosen and Weissman are striking back with unexpected vehemence.

The defense attorneys are expected to argue that receiving information from administration officials was something the two were paid and encouraged to do and something AIPAC routinely does (Forward, December 23,2005). In other words, Rosen and Weissman will say that pumping top US government officials for confidential memos and handing them over to Israeli officials was a common practice among AIPAC operatives. To bolster their case of "just following AIPAC orders", Rosen and Weissman's defense lawyers will subpoena AIPAC officials to testify in court about their past access to confidential documents, their contacts with high-placed officials and their collaboration with Israeli Embassy officials. Such testimony could likely bring national and international exposure to AIPAC's role as a two way transmission belt to and from Israel."

[H2O Man]

44. From last summer ......

but worth reading ....
http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/vae/ArchivePress/AugustPDFArchive/05/20050804franklinrosenweissmannr.pdf

[H2O Man]

45. Also ....

http://www.cicentre.com/Documents/DOC_Larry_Franklin_Case.htm

[H2O Man]

46. The significance of this issue

is not based on ethnic or religious issues. It's that a group of people are focused upon promoting an aggressive US policy in the Middle East, including wanting to up the tensions with Iran. We are at a point where American citizens should be concerned about the administration's failed policy in Iraq, and about pressures from some interests to confront Iran militarily. More, in light of the Abramoff scandal, it is worth examining how any group uses money to influence the members of the House of Representatives and the Senate.

[im10ashus]

47. Kicking this.

What's Abramoff's role, if any, in PNAC? Was he a charter member? PNAC's interest in controlling the Middle East has always been of interest to me. They are why I don't think we are going to leave Iraq. It's all part of their plan.

[Catrina]

49. I agree, Abramoff didn't sign the PNAC as I recall

but that doesn't mean he isn't a part of it all. He could not have operated on the scale that he did without backing from some very powerful people.

It might be interesting to track where all the money came from, and went, not just the Congressional donations he made.

He and his partner, Kidan, eg, were able to borrow millions of dollars from two 'lendes' even though Kidan had a very bad financial record. Why would that happen? The lenders were asked, but 'refused to comment'.

I think they need to comment. I'd like to know how someone with bad credit can get a $23 million dollar loan, even if it is together with another individual. Just having Kidan's name on the application should have caused problems with that kind of money, his credit rating was so bad but apparently it did not.

Why were they so determined to buy Suncruz gambling Casinos? Is it true that Atta and other hi-jackers were actually on a Suncruz boat?

Another point raised in the OP. Was there a plot to plant WMDs in Iraq, and if the Aipac case is connected to the Plame case? It is through Larry Franklin and Douglas Feith. And Judith Miller, who always seems to pop up in these various scandals. Judith Miller claimed to have special security clearance, which most journalists say is outrageous and if true, makes her a government agent rather than a journalist. Was this ever investigated? She claimed it, then was challenged, and then silence.

As many have speculated, Judith Miller's little foray into Iraq where she ordered the troops around and threatened to report directly to Rumsfeld if they didn't listen to her, seems to have been so that she could report on the glorious mission being completed, when the elusive WMDs were found. They were not, but why?

Most of us did think they would plant them. I think they tried, based on all I have read, particularly the info on Basra. Also, remember George Bush claimed at one point that they had been found. On another occasion, a press conference, he said he was looking forward to hearing they had been found. He mentioned the name of a person who, he said, would report back that they were found.

Who was assuring him of this? And what foiled their attempt? Was it Brewster Jennings? Was it too late when they shut it down, or did they shut it down as revenge for the foiling of their plans? Was David Kay in on the plot, or was he meant to 'find' WMD, but didn't and was honest about it? I don't know the answers to any of these questions, I dont' even know for sure if they did intend to plant WMD or tried, but it seems more than likely, and it seems there is some evidence that they may have.

We may never know, but nothing they might do would surprise me. Personally I do think they did not go after Joe Wilsom so viciously, risk so much, just because of an article he wrote which would b e long forgotten a few days later. There seems to be a lot more reason to involve so many top WH officials and journalists in what would be a petty scheme just to say 'gothca' to one guy for writing an article. I don't believe that anymore.

[im10ashus]

53. Perhaps Kidan had financial "backers" as collateral.

As anyone who has ever tried to get a loan with bad or no credit could probably attest, you would need significant collateral to secure a loan, or someone to co-sign. We've always said "follow the money."

As far as "Is it true that Atta and other hi-jackers were actually on a Suncruz boat?" I don't honestly know. I've seen that kicked around here on DU in other threads. But I haven't really seen a "reputable" report. Any links you can provide?

I also can only speculate as to who it was that was reporting to * on the WMD issue. Hopefully time will tell. Was it Miller via Rove and/or Libby?

[Catrina]

61. Good point, and if he did have backers, the lenders are not

saying who they were, so far ~ but you're right, and it does answer the question as to how, with his disastrous financial situation at the time, Kidan managed to get so much money. Follow the money! That always seems to work. Now, I wonder, will the prosecutors pursue this angle?

Kidan was also a suspect in the murder of Gus Boulis, a case that remained unsolved until just a few months ago when the three men, at least two of them, as I recall, mafia connected, were arrested. Kidan had paid large sums of money to one or more of them around the time of the murder. Abramoff was Kidan's partner at that time. The Suncruz Casinos had been bought by Kidan and Abramoff, but I think Boulis remained involved and was furious about how they were running them.

I have read reports from that period, I think Boulis was murdered in 2,000 sometime, no later than 2001, certainly around the time of 9/11.

You asked about Atta being on Suncruz! There are many articles that include that information, but this one may have been one of the first to report it. There seems to be little doubt that the FBI took it seriously enough to investigate it.

SunCruz Casinos turns over documents in terrorist probe

TAMPA, Fla. - SunCruz Casinos has turned over photographs and other documents to FBI investigators after employees said they recognized some of the men suspected in the terrorist attacks as customers.

Michael Hlavsa, chairman of the gambling cruise company, said Wednesday two or three men linked to the Sept. 11 hijackings may have been customers on a ship that sailed from Madeira Beach on Florida's gulf coast.

9/26/01 By VICKIE CHACHERE Associated Press Writer and Florida Times-Union

http://www.casinowatch.org/terrorists/terrorists_at_casinos.html

Reading through that link, it is obvious that many think Casinos could have been used to launder money. It's also interesting that back then, it was being reported that the hi-jackers apparently visited several Gambling Casinos, including Las Vegas and in Buffalo, NY. Why would fundamentalist Islamists be visiting gambling casinos?

I also noticed the names of at least two Congressional Republicans, one from Nevada and one from Iowa, in the report. I do not remember if either or both of them were on the list of recipients of Abramoff money.

Edited to say that I really have to check dates, such as:

the exact date of the murder of Gus Boulis,
the date of the sale of Suncruz to Kidan and Abramoff.
The date of Bob Ney's criticism of Boulis entered into the Congressional Record.
The date that Kidan and Abramoff got the money. They did, supposedly forge documents to get it, one of the charges Abramoff pled guilty to.

Could their desperatation to buy Suncruz, which we have been told was simply a desire to be big Casino owners, have anything at all to do with 9/11? Apparently they had already acquired it before 9/11, thus the reports of Atta being aboard one of the boats being connected to Abramoff? Very, very interesting 'coincidences'!

[im10ashus]

65. I can't imagine the prosecutor's NOT pursuing this angle.

It's so 101. I guess it depends on how much the prosecutors want to know. You know what I mean? It must be unnerving to be pursuing such a shameless group of criminals. And with SunCruz seemingly having hosted such nefarious figures, there are more people starting to get a little on edge with regards to connections and who knew who.

There are some other posters here on DU who keep saying connect the dots. I think I am starting to understand that more fully. SunCruz was probably the point where they tipped their hand. Or so it seems at this point. It's becoming more and more like a Grisham novel.

[nolabels]

81. Exactly, the point being they were working to entangle the US deeper......

so everyone along the path could gain in money, power and status. The idea all the spooks from every province, country, bureau or what have you are all involved and know everybody else's business is a clear case of the 'make work for all involved and screw John Q. Public'. The thinking of a bottomless pit for interlopers. With shrinking of the Soviet bloc many would have be out of work without this stuff going on. Instigating mayhem, what else do they have do :shrug:

[leesa]

48. Great post...and people wonder why some can't support Hillary

and Lieberman with their AIPAC ties. Just be honest Hillary. Can't wait until this breaks wide open. Thanks for posting. It's time we break free of these bindings and take care of our own country.

[stop the bleeding]

50. Someone please help me here... I went to the site that H2O man had

a link to in his original posting and for some reason I can not locate the articles that he is talking about. I am sure it is front of me, but I am unable to locate the pages and articles that he mentioned. I have been following the Plame story very closely and hence that is why H2O man mentioning the planting of WMD's caught my attention. I would like to be informed like the rest of you but as stated before "I'm stupid" and seem to be missing the articles.

Thanks in advance for anyone who can give me some direction.

[bud E. holly]

51. The problem is the link takes you to the December issue

I ran into the same thing myself, and was trying to figure out how to access the Jan/Feb issue that H2O Man references. I was called away from my computer but will try again to. Anyone with a quick answer, please let us know.

[stop the bleeding]

52. Thank you and BTW - Welcome to DU

911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911



America you are my Slave



911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911


911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911 911

[bud E. holly]

54. Ok, I'm officially stumped

I'm sure the answer is right in front of my nose, but I cannot bring up the Jan/Feb '06 issue. My lack of Web savvy is showing. Thank-you for the welcome......sorry I've been no help so far.

help

[Catrina]

59. I've had the same problem. Maybe when he returns H2O Man

can sort it out. I did check the letters available, and the articles listed, but all are from Dec. or before that. I could not access the January information either.

[stop the bleeding]

60. I am glad that I am not the only one - thank you n/t

[bud E. holly]

55. Nevertheless

The www.franklingate.com link works fine and is a treasure trove all by itself. This thread by H2O Man should be pinned to the top of GD. Very important and timely in view of the rumblings about Iran and the uncertainty in Israel's leadership.

[stop the bleeding]

56. Anytime H2O mans "posts" a thread it is always worth reading, and

if he comments on a thread I generally read those as well.

Checking web site again.

[H2O Man]

62. I get the magazine.

It may be that the articles aren't put up on the web right away. Sorry about that. Maybe I'll take the time to "reproduce" them here in the next 24 hours.

Several similar groups have gone under, due to lack of finances, thus cutting down on the number of good sources of information available to the American public. March is this group's 25th anniversary, and I know that there is a concern that there may not be enough money to put out another edition of the magazine.

[stop the bleeding]

63. As always thank you for the insight and clarity for times that are often

unclear. I will keep checking the site and this thread for updates. That would be a sad day if a source like this is taken out of circulation. I guess that is the cycle of life.

Thanks again.

[stop the bleeding]

64. see post #62 by H2O man - peace out n/t

[robertpaulsen]

66. An economic motive for this, courtesy of The 9/11 Commission Report.

A valuable lesson you reminded all of us about on the Plame threads is that it helps to connect the dots when you have the answer to the question: Why? Why did high ranking members of the most powerful lobby for Israel in America engage in espionage?

There are obvious political reasons. Israel is considered to be one of America's staunchest political allies in the Middle East. The target within this spy probe seems to focus on Iran and Syria, two of Israel's staunchest political foes. But I started to think about the economic motive while reading page 378 of The 9/11 Commission Report:

The U.S. government has announced the goal of working toward a Middle East Free Trade Area, or MEFTA, by 2013.The United States has been seek-
ing comprehensive free trade agreements (FTAs) with the Middle Eastern
nations most firmly on the path to reform.The U.S.-Israeli FTA was enacted
in 1985, and Congress implemented an FTA with Jordan in 2001. Both agree-
ments have expanded trade and investment, thereby supporting domestic eco-
nomic reform. In 2004, new FTAs were signed with Morocco and Bahrain,
and are awaiting congressional approval.These models are drawing the inter-
est of their neighbors. Muslim countries can become full participants in the
rules-based global trading system, as the United States considers lowering its
trade barriers with the poorest Arab nations.

http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-395.html


So, our government is seeking to create a free trade agreement in the Middle East. Who's the big proponent pushing this?


U.S.-Middle East Free Trade Initiative

In May 2003, President Bush proposed a U.S.-Middle East Free Trade Initiative aimed at encouraging growth and opportunity in the region. The initiative will build on U.S. Free Trade Agreements with Israel, Jordan, Bahrain, Morocco and Oman.

In an October 2004 speech preceding a trip to the region to discuss free trade negotiations with the United Arab Emirates and Oman, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick stated that the strategy the Bush administration is taking in regards to MEFTA "is to link (the nations who have signed FTAs with the U.S.) to one another, opening trade not just with the United States, but also among Middle Eastern countries."

more...

http://www.calchamber.com/CC/BusinessResources/InternationalResources/AllAboutInternationalTrade/TradeIssues/USMiddleEastFreeTradeInitiative.htm


Who is Robert Zoellick? Here's a refresher:

January 26, 1998

The Honorable William J. Clinton
President of the United States
Washington, DC

Dear Mr. President:

We are writing you because we are convinced that current American policy toward Iraq is not succeeding, and that we may soon face a threat in the Middle East more serious than any we have known since the end of the Cold War. In your upcoming State of the Union Address, you have an opportunity to chart a clear and determined course for meeting this threat. We urge you to seize that opportunity, and to enunciate a new strategy that would secure the interests of the U.S. and our friends and allies around the world. That strategy should aim, above all, at the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power. We stand ready to offer our full support in this difficult but necessary endeavor.

The policy of “containment” of Saddam Hussein has been steadily eroding over the past several months. As recent events have demonstrated, we can no longer depend on our partners in the Gulf War coalition to continue to uphold the sanctions or to punish Saddam when he blocks or evades UN inspections. Our ability to ensure that Saddam Hussein is not producing weapons of mass destruction, therefore, has substantially diminished. Even if full inspections were eventually to resume, which now seems highly unlikely, experience has shown that it is difficult if not impossible to monitor Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons production. The lengthy period during which the inspectors will have been unable to enter many Iraqi facilities has made it even less likely that they will be able to uncover all of Saddam’s secrets. As a result, in the not-too-distant future we will be unable to determine with any reasonable level of confidence whether Iraq does or does not possess such weapons.

Such uncertainty will, by itself, have a seriously destabilizing effect on the entire Middle East. It hardly needs to be added that if Saddam does acquire the capability to deliver weapons of mass destruction, as he is almost certain to do if we continue along the present course, the safety of American troops in the region, of our friends and allies like Israel and the moderate Arab states, and a significant portion of the world’s supply of oil will all be put at hazard. As you have rightly declared, Mr. President, the security of the world in the first part of the 21st century will be determined largely by how we handle this threat.

snip

Sincerely,

Elliott Abrams Richard L. Armitage William J. Bennett

Jeffrey Bergner John Bolton Paula Dobriansky

Francis Fukuyama Robert Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad

William Kristol Richard Perle Peter W. Rodman

Donald Rumsfeld William Schneider, Jr. Vin Weber

Paul Wolfowitz R. James Woolsey Robert B. Zoellick

http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm


In order, for MEFTA to be effective by 2013, it would be beneficial to have as many nations in the region on board as possible. Iran has either the third or second greatest reserves of oil in the region. Israel's neighbor Syria recently signed a mutual defense pact with Iran.

Connect the dots.

[robertpaulsen]

67. Here's more on Robert Zoellick, courtesy of Demopedia

Robert B. Zoellick

From Demopedia

Categories: U.S. Official | PNAC | Republicans

Robert Bruce Zoellick (born July 25, 1953) is the current United States Deputy Secretary of State. Before his present position, he served as United States Trade Representative from February 7, 2001 until February 22, 2005.
Table of contents
1 Business
2 During George H.W. Bush
3 Bush Family Man
4 See also
5 External links

Business

Robert Zoellick also serves or has served as a board member on a number of private and public organizations:

* Alliance Capital, Said Holdings, and the Precursor Group;
* Member of the advisory boards of Enron and Viventures, a venture fund;
* Director of the Aspen Institute's Strategy Group
* Council on Foreign Relations
* German Marshall Fund of the United States
* World Wildlife Advisory Council
* Member of Secretary William Sebastian Cohen's Defense Policy Board.<1> (http://www.ustr.gov/about-ustr/ambassador/zoellick.html)<2> (http://www.ustdrc.gov/members/zoellick.html)
* Member of Trilateral Commission
* Member of the PNAC and an original signer of the PNAC letter to Bill Clinton.

more...

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Robert_B._Zoellick

Whatta guy.

[im10ashus]

68. GREAT WORK!!!

Kicking this again!

Connecting the dots is so much fun. Why do we always go back to PNAC? :shrug:

I keep finding that PNAC has too much an interest in the Middle East for our own good. As long as PNAC and its members continue to influence politics in Washington, we will have a physical presence in the Middle East, and we've already started our base in Iraq. What lies between Iraq and Afghanistan? Based on the premise that past performance is the best indicator of future behavior, I'd say Iran is next on the agenda, and the rhetoric coming from Iran indicates they too understand the strategy.

[H2O Man]

69. "...we always go back to PNAC..."

I read a new, very interesting thread by Will Pitt regarding the growing tensions regarding Iran. Again, if one wants to go to the root of those tensions, it requires examining PNAC and the goals outlined by the group for the next century. In fact, one cannot hope to have a grasp of the issues involved without considering it in that context.

[im10ashus]

70. The fact that PNAC operates without scrutiny is cause enough...

...for concern. You never hear them mentioned in any "MSM" and its membership includes some of the most hawkish Washington insiders. Do you have the Will Pitt link? I can just do a search.

roberpaulsen has provided some great links above.

[robertpaulsen]

72. I believe I found the WilliamPitt link.

Attack on Iran: A Looming Folly
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=85844

Points out how stupid it would be to attack Iran. But then, taking into account what a stupid pResident we have...

It's great to have such good threads up. Expect Iran to be big in the news very soon.

[im10ashus]

73. Thanks.

I was just getting ready to do a search. I think you found it for me. Thanks!

[im10ashus]

74. Robert Paulsen found the link.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x85844

Neither of these threads should sink. KEEP THESE KICKED!!!

:kick:

[robertpaulsen]

75. Checking on Stephen Cambone's affiliations with PNAC

Going back to the article my OP was on, the 4-5 man task force from OSP was connected to Feith, Hadley & Stephen Cambone. I know we've explored Feith & Hadley pretty thoroughly on the Plame threads, but I was looking for dirt on Cambone.

Here's something interesting:

Who is Stephen Cambone?
Rumsfeld's Henchman
Stephen Cambone, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's right-hand man, was for the first time caught in the glare of media attention as part of the congressional inquiry into Iraq prison abuses. Under sharp questioning by a few senators on May 11, 2004, Cambone vigorously defended both Rumsfeld and Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy. Cambone's attempt to split hairs on whether the Geneva Conventions were applicable to intelligence gathering in Iraq and his awkward defense of the role of military intelligence in interrogations put him at odds with the U.S. Army general who first investigated abuses at Abu Ghraib prison. As the first-ever undersecretary of defense for intelligence, Cambone will likely come under increased fire as the prison scandal unfolds. Some of the most intense questioning of Cambone centered on whether the Geneva Conventions were "precisely" respected. What "precisely" Cambone knew and when he knew it, and what precisely was the role of military intelligence will be questions that Cambone will be required to answer.

snip

The two Rumsfeld commissions focused on the issues at the top of the list for the national security militarists and the large military contractors: the ballistic missile threat to the United States and U.S. space-based defense capabilities. In the tradition of Team B, the unstated agenda of these commissions was to turn up pressure on the administration to support new weapons programs and substantially increase major military spending. Both commissions received funding from defense spending bills – in effect using taxpayer revenues to subsidize them. But perusing the backgrounds and connections of the individuals charged with overseeing the commissions, Rumsfeld and his right-hand man Stephen Cambone, most observers at the time believed that the conclusions were preordained.

After Rumsfeld was named defense secretary, he made Cambone his special assistant in January 2001. Then, in March 2003 Cambone was appointed the first-ever undersecretary for intelligence – a position that "will allow the Defense Department to consolidate its intelligence programs in a way that could undermine CIA head George Tenet's role," one defense analyst noted. Well-known and much-despised by both military and civilian officials in the Pentagon prior to joining the Bush II administration, Cambone, serving as Rumsfeld's henchman and intelligence chief, soon began creating a new enemies list in the CIA and State Department.

While Cambone was directing the two Rumsfeld commissions, he also participated in two national security strategy and military transformation commissions sponsored by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and the National Institute for Public Policy (NIPP). The institute's 2001 report, Rationale and Requirements for Nuclear Forces and Arms Control, and PNAC's Rebuilding America's Defenses were blueprints for Rumsfeld's promised "revolution in military affairs." Several other PNAC associates, in addition to Rumsfeld himself, also served on the Rumsfeld commissions, including Paul Wolfowitz, Malcolm Wallop, William Schneider, and James Woolsey. Both the NIPP and PNAC studies seem to have served as blueprints for the defense policies initiated by the administration of George W. Bush with respect to nuclear policy, national security strategy, and military transformation.

more...

http://antiwar.com/news/?articleid=2659

[H2O Man]

76. There are 13 pages

with information on him in Seymour Hersh's "Chain of Command." Do you have that book?

[H2O Man]

77. Hersh's book

has some very interesting information on SC. One interesting note in the book is in regard to his close association with Lieutenant General Boykin, Cambone's military assistant. DUers may recall that Boykin gave a talk to a group in Oregon where he exlained that Bush "wasn't elected" to office, but actually was "appointed by God" (okay, I agree he wasn't elected) .... he noted that Bush is a "man who prays in the Oval office," and stressed the importance of this at a time when "Satan wants to destroy this nation, he wants to destroy us as a nation, and he wants to destroy us as a Christian army." Boykin went on to reveal that Muslims hate America "because we are a nation of believers."

Boykin is representative of a significant segment of "fundie" Christians within the neoconservative movement who believe {a} that the Muslims are "of Satan"; {b} and thus part of the "Satanic plot" against America; {c} and that this plot involves dark, non-christian forces within the USA as well as in other countries; and {d} that God has appointed George W. Bush to represent His Will on earth, including in the increasing conflict in the Middle East.

It is impossible -- and I mean that -- for anyone to take a serious look at the risks of conflict in the conflict with Iran, without taking the ideas expressed by Boykin into account.

[Me.]

79. Is It Only Non-Christians

who form Satan's coalition? Aren't progressives and those who criticize them part of the enemy, those who are not like them?

[DemonFighterLives]

71. Interesting Thread

I'm putting a marker here so I can come back and finish reading.
The Neocons/Pentagon got caught with their pants down and I hope justice is firm with them.
Off to Jury duty for me.
Happy Birthday Robert Paulson! :party:

[stepnw1f]

78. Thanks for the Info

Need to boomark.

[Clara T]

80. kick for info