U.S. Increases Nuclear Energy Spending as It Fights Global Weapons Ban
-
Watch this video:
7 years ago
In the belief that the truth shall set us free. . .
". . .bring daughters in clean and ironed dresses with hair brushed to perfection; their sons wear white shirts and ties and have missionary haircuts."
". . .nurturers. This is their special assignment and role under the plan of happiness. . . Another word for nurturing is homemaking. Homemaking includes cooking, washing clothes and dishes, and keeping an orderly home. Home is where women have the most power and influence; therefore, Latter-day Saint women should be the best homemakers in the world. . . Nurturing requires organization, patience, love, and work. Helping growth occur through nurturing is truly a powerful and influential role bestowed on women."
Mary Mapes! You've got Mary Mapes?! Wow.
Okay, I confess. I spent months in 2005 researching what happened to Dan Rather. I would have finished, and written something up, but the story kept growing.
And I was suddenly interrupted by the Carter Baker Panel, ACVR, etc. and felt like I desperately had to focus on election theft.
And the rest is history.
But that summer, at the first Cindy Sheehan vigil, The Salt Lake Tribune captured the most outrageous photo of me at the moment when, as I spoke about getting the real news, I declared passionately, "Dan Rather was right!"
Whatever mistakes were made, he was right. Bush ducked out of his already plush Air National Guard gig and was AWOL - a spoiled selfish arrogant brat. And since then, he and his folk have lied, and sent others to their deaths. Grrrrrrrr.
Digging into the story, I found Rather's magnificent confrontive interview of Daddy in 1988, as well as a quote from Cheney about how Daddy Bush holds a grudge.
I also discovered that the man who ran the investigatory panel set up by CBS, Richard Thornburgh, who of course was Daddy's AG, has spent a lot of his time and energy at the Justice Department reclassifying documents as secret and covering for the antics of Neil and George W.
Then there's Bill Burkett, Rather's source, a man who was desperate to have the public hear about what he'd seen and what a corrupt man George W. Bush was.
Not only was Burkett THE WITNESS to Bush's National Guard files being cleansed, but his story was told by James Moore in his Bush's War for Re-Election: Iraq, the White House, and the People, released in early 2004, and Moore is also the co-author with Wayne Slater of Bush's Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential, the book revealing the kind of fiend that Karl Rove has always been.
Burkett was contacted after appearing with Moore, and memos were handed off in a non-trackable way. Burkett did nothing with them for months, until the swift-boating began.
It was a set up! And Bush/Rove got to take so many down.
I just want Mary to know, and Dan, that they've got a passionate, obnoxiously outspoken supporter here in li'l ol' Salt Lake.
I'm on hold now Brad - talk to me!
To follow up on what I spoke about regarding Bush 1’s Attorney General, Dick Thornburgh, who ran the panel that investigated CBS’s National Guard story, here is a section from the an article in the March/April 1993 Columbia Journal Review by Russ W. Baker, "IRAQGATE, The Big One That (Almost) Got Away, Who Chased it – and Who Didn’t"
" ARMING SADDAM
The United States and its European allies have laws and policies designed to prevent arms and military technology from getting into the hands of developing countries, especially where there is a likelihood of their reckless deployment. If these controls were aimed at anyone, certainly they were aimed at the highly repressive, swaggering Iraqi regime, with its history of threatening both its neighbors and its citizens.
Still, when Saddam went to war against Iran, becoming the world’s chief practitioner of chemical warfare, U.S. realpolitikers dubbed him the lesser of two evils, and the one less likely to disrupt the oil flow. The essence of Iraqgate is that secret efforts to support him became the order of the day, both during his long war with Iran and afterward.
Much of what Saddam received from the West was not arms per se, but so-called dual-use technology – ultra sophisticated computers, armored ambulances, helicopters, chemicals, and the like, with potential civilian uses as well as military applications. We’ve learned by now that a vast network of companies, based in the U.S. and abroad, eagerly fed the Iraqi war machine right up until August 1990, when Saddam invaded Kuwait.
And we’ve learned that the obscure Atlanta branch of Italy’s largest bank, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro [BBT Note: a client of Baker Botts, the law firm of notorious Bush consigliere James Baker III], relying partially on U.S. taxpayer-guaranteed loans, funneled $ 5 billion to Iraq from 1985 to 1989. Some government-backed loans were supposed to be for agricultural purposes, but were used to facilitate the purchase of stronger stuff than wheat. Federal Reserve and Agriculture department memos warned of suspected abuses by Iraq, which apparently took advantage of the loans to free up funds for munitions. U.S. taxpayers have been left holding the bag for what looks like $ 2 billion in defaulted loans to Iraq.
All of this was not yet clear in August 1989, when FBI agents raided U.S. branches of BNL, hitting the jackpot in Atlanta. The branch manager in that city, Christopher Drogoul, was charged with making unauthorized, clandestine, and illegal loans to Iraq – some of which, according to the indictment, were used to purchase arms and weapons technology. Yet three months after the raid, White House officials went right on backing Saddam, approving $ 1 billion more in U.S. government loan guarantees for farm exports to Iraq, even though it was becoming clear that the country was beating plowshares into swords.
At the time, inquiring minds wondered whether Drogoul could possibly have acted alone in such a mammoth operation, as the U.S. government alleged. Was there a formal, secret plan to arm Iraq? And did the U.S. government engage in a massive coverup when evidence of such a plan began to emerge?
In fact, we now know that in February 1990, then Attorney General Dick Thornburgh blocked U.S. investigators from traveling to Rome and Istanbul to pursue the case. And that the lead investigator lacked the basic financial know-how to handle such an investigation, and made an extraordinarily feeble effort to get to the bottom of things.
More damningly, we know know that mid-level staffers at the commerce department altered Iraqi export licenses to obscure the exported materials’ military function – before sending the documents on to Congress, which was investigating the affair.
Eventually, it would turn out that elements of the U.S. government almost certainly knew that Drogoul was funneling U.S.-backed loans – intended for the purchase of agricultural products, machinery, trucks, and other U.S. goods – into dual-use technology and outright military technology. And that the British government was fully aware of the operations of Matrix Churchill, a British firm with an Ohio branch, which was not only at the center of the Iraqi procurement network but was also funded by BNL Atlanta. (Precision equipment supplied by Matrix Churchill was reportedly a target this January when the Western allies renewed their attack on Iraq).
It would later be alleged by bank executives that the Italian government, long a close U.S. ally as well as BNL’s ultimate owner, had knowledge of BNL’s loan diversions. It looked to some like an international coalition. As New York Times columnist William Safire argued last December 7, “Iraqgate is uniquely horrendous: a scandal about the systematic abuse of power by misguided leaders of three democratic nations to secretly finance the arms buildup of a dictator.”
Safire had been on the case since 1989, turning out slashing op-ed pieces. But readers of the Times’s news pages must have wondered where Safire’s body-blows were coming from, since the news columns contained almost nothing about Iraqgate for the longest time. "
In addition, this from Webster Tarpley’s George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography
The old imperialist idea of Theodore Roosevelt was quickly revived by the Bush administration during 1989. Through a series of actions by Attorney General Richard Thornburgh, the U.S. Supreme Court, and CIA Director William Webster, the Bush regime arrogated to itself a sweeping carte blanche for extraterritorial interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states, all in open defiance of the norms of international law.
These illegal innovations can be summarized under the heading of the “Thornburgh Doctrine.”
The Federal Bureau of Investigation arrogated to itself the “right” to search premises outside of U.S. territory and to arrest and kidnap foreign citizens outside of U.S. jurisdiction, all without the concurrence of the judicial process of the other countries whose territory was thus subject to violation.
U.S. armed forces were endowed with the “right” to take police measures against civilians.
The CIA demanded that an Executive Order prohibiting the participation of U.S. government officials and military personnel in the assassination of foreign political leaders, which had been issued by President Ford in October 1976, be rescinded.
There is every indication that this presidential ban on assassinations of foreign officials and politicians, which had been promulgated in response to the Church and Pike Committees’ investigations of CIA abuses, has indeed been abrogated.
To round out this lawless package, an opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court issued on February 28, 1990 permitted U.S. officials abroad to arrest (or kidnap) and search foreign citizens without regard to the laws or policy of the foreign nation subject to this interference.
Through these actions, the Bush regime effectively staked its claim to universal extraterritorial jurisdiction, the classic posture of an empire seeking to assert universal police power. The Bush regime aspired to the status of a world power “legibus solutus,” a superpower exempted from all legal restrictions.
Recent reports from Greg Palast of the BBC reveal that many who are in the military serving overseas had their votes deliberately thrown out -- not counted -- in the 2004 election.
It was called "Voter Caging". Registered voters whose addresses were in low-income African American neighborhoods, homeless shelters, and military bases in the United States were sent registered letters, with the envelopes marked "Do Not Forward" requesting that the voter confirm his or her mailing address by return mail.
Those voters who did not respond had their names removed from the voter registry lists. If they tried to vote in person, their votes were challenged and never counted. If they voted from overseas, their votes were tossed, without notifying the voters.
This was a deliberate method of removing the votes of low income voters, particularly African Americans, who statistically are more likely to vote for the Democratic ticket.
The program was run by a clever operative at the Republican National Committee. His name is Timothy Griffin, and he is the friend of Karl Rove's who received the appointment to be the United States Attorney in Arkansas, replacing Bud Cummins, who was investigating another Republican election operative, Mark "Thor" Hearne, spokesman for the phony "non-partisan" American Center for Voting Rights, pushing the non-issue of Voter Fraud to distract from the real issue of vote theft, formerly General Counsel for BushCheney 2004.
Is your head spinning? The point is --
In 2004, thousands of votes sent from our overseas military personnel, fighting for democracy, were illegally dumped on purpose by the Republican National Committee.
The story isn't over. When U.S. Attorney Timothy Griffin learned that House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, Jr. had met with reporter Greg Palast and seen the evidence, he immediately resigned.
And Conyers has said that he isn't done with Griffin yet.
NPR, my friend of over 30 years, has not reported this.
To check this story out, go to www.bradblog.com and/or www.gregpalast.com.
“Our biggest problem with the Bush administration is that for us it’s deja vu all over again. We spent six years watching the man as governor of Texas, the basis for our 1999 book, Shrub: The Short but Happy Political Life of George W. Bush. We were tempted to begin this book by observing, ‘If y’all had’ve read the first book, we wouldn’t had to write this one.’”
"In November 2004, for the first time since the era of the Night Riders, one major political party launched a program of mass challenges of voters on Election Day. Paid Republican operatives, working from lists prepared by the party, fingered tens of thousands of voters in Ohio, Florida and elsewhere, questioning their right to a ballot.
"One of these secret 'caging lists' was obtained by BBC Television from inside Republican campaign headquarters in Florida. Every one of the voters on those sheets resided in African American neighborhoods, excepting a few in precincts of elderly Jewish voters.
"These lists helped Republican poll workers challenge voters on the basis of an alleged change of address. An analysis of one roster showed that several of those facing challenge were African American soldiers whose address changed because they were shipped overseas.
"Challenged voters were shunted to 'provisional ballots,' which, in Ohio and elsewhere, were not counted on the flimsiest of technicalities."
"Here's how the scheme worked: The RNC mailed these voters letters in envelopes marked, "Do not forward", to be returned to the sender. These letters were mailed to servicemen and women, some stationed overseas, to their US home addresses. The letters then returned to the Bush-Cheney campaign as 'undeliverable.'
"The lists of soldiers of 'undeliverable' letters were transmitted from state headquarters, in this case Florida, to the RNC in Washington. The party could then challenge the voters' registration and thereby prevent their absentee ballots being counted."
"A check of the demographics of the addresses on the 'caging lists,' as the GOP leaders called them indicated that most were in African-American majority zip codes."
"...failed to disclose that he had some knowledge of the White House's interest in selecting Tim Griffin as the interim U.S. attorney in the Eastern District of Arkansas, inaccurately described the department's internal assessment of the Parsky commission, and failed to disclose that he had some knowledge of allegations that Tim Griffin had been involved in vote- cadging during his work on the president's 2004 campaign." [9]
"We write to request that the Department of Justice promptly investigate allegations that the Republican National Committee engaged in "vote caging" during the 2004 elections. We also ask that you investigate whether any Department officials were aware of allegations that Tim Griffin had engaged in caging when he was appointed United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas, and whether appropriate action was taken. Caging is a reprehensible voter suppression tactic, and it may also violate federal law and the terms of applicable judicially enforceable consent decrees." [13]
Conyers: Thank you Madam Chair. Now you never, did you just say you didn't know anything about caging?
McNulty: What I said was that when I was asked that question at the Senate hearing, all I knew about the subject was that there was an article.
Conyers: Was that article by Greg Palast about African American soldiers scrubbed by secret GOP hit lists? Dated June 16, 2006? Was that it as you recall?
McNulty: That's the article I'm referring to.
Conyers: And didn't Monica Goodling tell you that caging might come up at the hearing as she was briefing you?
McNulty: Yes that's correct.
Conyers: And did it come up?
McNulty: It did.
Conyers: And you didn't, & your response was you never looked at the caging even though Goodling told you. You saw the Greg Palast article & it was put in your in briefing testimony for the Senate in your briefing book
McNulty: Right.
Conyers: And you didn't look at the material in your briefing book outside of the article?
McNulty: Mr Chairman I didn't read the article, I was aware the article existed because Senator Prior referred to it in his testimony right before I got up to testify & Ms Goodling had raised the issue the day before. But I had not read the article & not become familiar with the issue, even if I had read that article Mr Chairman, if I just may say so, even if I had read that article, & I was asked that question again by Senator Schumer, I would still be very careful before I started speaking because, information based upon just one article
Conyers: But there was more in your briefing book.
McNulty: There was another Tim Griffin e-mail which gave his explanation of that article which I have now seen but I hadn't read before I testified.
Conyers: So could I infer that caging of black voters may not have been one of the high items on your list as your responsibility as Dep AG?
McNulty: Well I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Conyers: What I mean by it is, Goodling told you about it, it's in your case, it's in your Senate testimony & yet you fail to answer questions on the subject before the Senate & you tell me even now, as of today have you looked at it yet?
McNulty: I have now read the article & I've read that e-mail
Conyers: I mean the whole subject matter of caging. I mean this disenfranchises lots of people. Well first of all, you know caging is challenging lists of voters that are usually minority voters
Unidentified voice: Would the gentleman yield because I think Ms Goodling's testimony slightly inaudible
Conyers: Wait a minute, let me just finish my question, I'll get back to you Chris, I always do, you know that. But we've got a whole chain of testimony, this is one of the big issues that came out of, at least a couple of major elections of this country, & you're saying 'yes I was told about it, yes it was in my tab in the briefing book for Senate testimony & yes I looked at Palast's article but I didn't read it'. Why does it not generate much concern or attention to you this for me, voter rights is one of the big problems that we have in terms of having it enforced in the Department of Justice? [15]
We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war.
Raise hell.
Think of something to make the ridiculous look ridiculous.
Make our troops know we're for them and trying to get them out of there.
Hit the streets to protest Bush's proposed surge.
If you can, go to the peace march in Washington on January 27.
We need people in the streets, banging pots and pans and demanding, "Stop it, now!"