The Agenda Project: Patriotic Millionaires' Message to Congress "Tax Me"

Ten years ago GW Bush was sworn into office after a contentious election, and launched a political effort to cut taxes for the wealthy.  His meme was to "return your money" saying that the budget surpluses (which were already evaporating by the time he was sworn into office) indicated that the government was taking in too much money and that the taxes should be cut.  That created an enormous tax cut system that benefited the rich and wealthy, a system the Republicans are working hard to preserve in the face of provisions in the tax cuts that make them expire now.

Some of the rich disagree ...




BTW - whether GW Bush was elected, or stole the election, is a debate for another day

Review: The End of America (Naomi Wolf)

Remember the mid-2000's when President Bush really was running roughshod over the laws of the United States of America, and working real hard to establish the basis for a real fascist regime over the United States? Maybe you did not know about this, but I'd written a bunch of posts on this which you can access via the category tags at the top of this post. The End of America is a 2008 movie by journalist Naomi Wolf which was at the time a strident urgent warning against the illegal excesses and overreach of the Bush II administration. Today, with Obama being slimed right and left as a 'Fascist' it's worth watching this movie as a reminder of our recent past.

The movie is structured around 10 steps Ms. Wolf has identified which dictatorial governments around the world use to put their population under autocratic rule. To explain each of the steps, Naomi uses examples of Bush II Administration actions that implement the steps.

1. Invoke a terrifying internal and external enemy.
2. Create secret prisons where torture takes place.
3. Develop a thug caste or paramilitary force not answerable to citizens.
4. Set up an internal surveillance system.
5. Harass citizens' groups.
6. Engage in arbitrary detention and release.
7. Target key individuals.
8. Control the press.
9. Treat all political dissidents as traitors.
10. Suspend the rule of law.

Today, it would be a useful yardstick to compare the Bush II Administration excesses with the actions of the Obama Administration, to determine just how close Obama is to being an actual proto-Fascist as people are claiming.

The thing that I've noticed about the right wing blowhard Republicans is they tend to accuse others of the things they themselves are doing. Accusing Obama of Fascism would be par for the course, given the sort of autocratic tendencies the Republicans have followed since the Bush II years.
It's also true that the overreach by the Bush II Administration established principles of Presidential Behavior which the Obama Administration could be making use of. As one of the speakers in The End of America said, lost freedoms are like sand slipping between your fingers. The freedoms lost under the Bush Administration won't be automatically returned to we the people, instead we the people must fight to regain them.

One thing I'm wondering from watching this movie is to what extent it acted to inspire the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party people are activisting for a return to Constitutional Rule, and The End of America closes with a call for a return to Constitutional Rule. I suspect that the Tea Party people may have a different idea of Constitutional than does Naomi Wolf.

Interview - Naomi Wolf - Give Me Liberty - is a video interview of Ms. Wolf in 2008 discussing the movie, the book, the above stuff, etc

The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot

In a stunning indictment of the Bush administration and Congress, best-selling author Naomi Wolf lays out her case for saving American democracy. In authoritative research and documentation Wolf explains how events of the last six years parallel steps taken in the early years of the 20th century‚'s worst dictatorships such as Germany, Russia, China, and Chile.

The book cuts across political parties and ideologies and speaks directly to those among us who are concerned about the ever-tightening noose being placed around our liberties.

In this timely call to arms, Naomi Wolf compels us to face the way our free America is under assault. She warns us‚-with the straight-to-fellow-citizens urgency of one of Thomas Paine‚'s revolutionary pamphlets‚-that we have little time to lose if our children are to live in real freedom.

The End of America: Director's Cut

This two-disc director's cut is jam packed with never-before-seen bonus material, including: an exclusive interview with Anthony Romero, president of the ACLU; a detailed interview with Daniel Ellsberg, former military analyst; a featurette with New York Times reporter Nicholas Kristof, and much more. Along with the rest of America, best-selling author and feminist Naomi Wolf was overwhelmed by the swell of conflicting information and the sudden march to war after 9/11. Wolf looked to history to help her understand the dramatic changes she believed she was witnessing, and discovered the disturbing similarities between post-9/11 US policy and that of historically fascist regimes such as Mussolini's Italy and Hitler's Germany. Wolf authored her next book, THE END OF AMERICA, which demonstrated that the United States was on a remarkably certain path toward ending democracy. Taking the thesis of her book to the streets, Wolf set out on a national tour to discuss the evolution of America from a functional democracy into a closed, fear-driven society with a terrifying absence of due process. In this profound and eye-opening film, Award-winning veteran documentarians Ricki Stern and Annie Sundberg (THE DEVIL CAME ON HORSEBACK, THE TRIALS OF DARRYL HUNT) accompany Wolf as she discusses America's dangerous passage towards becoming a society of fear and surveillance, and expresses her plea to restore our nation's most cherished values.

Senate Report: Bush Used Iraq Intel He Knew Was False

There's long been a question whether the Bush Administration was knowing telling falsehoods to justify the Iraq War or whether they were just confused. There's no doubt that the justifications they used were false ... but impeachability or culpability in a large extent rests on whether they purposely lied. Of course being so completely confused as to threaten us with Iraqi nuclear weapons, that did not exist, doesn't give any confidence as to their qualifications for high office.

Senate Intelligence Committee has finally released a long delayed report which covers these questions.

...The two final sections of a long-delayed and much anticipated "Phase II" report on the Bush administration's use of prewar intelligence, released on Thursday morning, accuse senior White House officials of repeatedly misrepresenting the threat posed by Iraq.

...The "Phase II" report states -- in terms clearer than any previous government publication -- that there was no operational relationship between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, that Bush officials were not truthful about the difficulties the United States would face in post-war Iraq and that their public statements did not reflect intelligence they had at the time, and, specifically, that the intelligence community would not confirm any meeting between Iraqi officials and Mohamed Atta -- a claim that was nevertheless publicly repeated.

"Before taking the country to war, this Administration owed it to the American people to give them a 100 percent accurate picture of the threat we faced. Unfortunately, our Committee has concluded that the Administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence," Rockefeller said in a statement provided to The Huffington Post.

However on a brief read of the reports the situation isn't as clear cut as "they lied" or that everything they said was 100% false.

The report follows a format of, for each type of potential weapon Iraq might have possessed, it first delineates the statements made by the Administration and then explores any existing supporting evidence in various reports. In many cases the administration statements were not completely supportable but not clearly a lie.

On nuclear weapons - The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOMM) repeatedly found that Iraq's nuclear program had been destroyed or neutralized. It was clear they had been buying dual use technologies, however, and that they retained intellectual capital (people and information) that would let them restart a nuclear program if they had the freedom. That it would take 7-8 years, with foreign help, to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon and a bit more time to build a missile. The Defense Intelligence Agency produced several reports discussing the aluminum tubes as dual use material, and attempts to buy nuclear material, however recall that the DIA was this special office set up to concoct propoganda and cooked intelligence. It's not surprising, then, in the next bullet to learn that the Department of Energy (DOE) contradicted these claims. The State Department Bureau of Intelligence and Research (State/INR) also disagreed, and instead reported that the aluminum tubes were meant for other purposes. The National Ground Intelligence Center had also disagreed and found that the aluminum tubes were consistent with "rocket casings" (which they were) and inconsistent with centrifuges.

...etc...

Article Reference: 

Senate Report: Bush Used Iraq Intel He Knew Was False

http://intelligence.senate.gov/080605/phase2a.pdf

http://intelligence.senate.gov/080605/phase2b.pdf

extvideo: 

Bush veto limits on torture? Or did Bush say he supports use of torture?

Pres. Bush a couple days ago veto'd a bill which included a provision that would have required all U.S. agencies to abide by the Military Interrogation manual. This would have required all U.S. agencies to not torture. That would be a great thing, it would be a move towards restoring some of the respect the U.S. used to have. But instead he veto'd the bill ... some press reports I've heard describe it in very bland terms, as if the government really is being hindered with limited interrogation techniques. Okay, that's one way to look at this event, and the other way to look at it is that Bush has acted in support of interrogation techniques abhorred worldwide and which are highly illegal. But this is par for the course for this president who has committed one illegal act after another.

Text: Bush on Veto of Intelligence Bill is the text of his weekly news address, in which he explains the veto thusly:

Quote:

...Unfortunately, Congress recently sent me an intelligence authorization bill that would diminish these vital tools. So today, I vetoed it....The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror — the C.I.A. program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives. This program has produced critical intelligence that has helped us prevent a number of attacks....The main reason this program has been effective is that it allows the C.I.A. to use specialized interrogation procedures to question a small number of the most dangerous terrorists under careful supervision. The bill Congress sent me would deprive the C.I.A. of the authority to use these safe and lawful techniques. Instead, it would restrict the C.I.A.’s range of acceptable interrogation methods to those provided in the Army field manual. The procedures in this manual were designed for use by soldiers questioning lawful combatants captured on the battlefield. They were not intended for intelligence professionals trained to question hardened terrorists....

In other words he's defending the use of torture (calling it lawful) because of the ticking time-bomb defense. The idea is you know there is a bomb somewhere, due to explode at a given time, you don't know where the bomb is, you don't know precisely when it will explode, but you have in your hands the person who planted the bomb. What do you do. If you're the star of the TV show 24 you don't let a little thing like laws stop you, you instead gird up your loins and commit torture in the name of God and Justice and Truth. But the real world experience with torture is the torturee often lies, or rather they get into a state of mind where they'll say anything just to get the pain to stop. You don't end up with truth, you end up with confusion.

The ACLU says:

Quote:

"It is fundamentally un-American when our president vetoes laws against torture," said Anthony Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. "The president's veto sends a message to the world that despite Congress' actions, our country will continue to engage in this inhumane and heinous conduct when we should be affirming unequivocally and in one voice that torture and abuse will stop and never happen again. No one is above the rule of law, including the president. Congress should hold firm and persist in trying to get an anti-torture bill signed into law."

However the International Herald Tribune, in Bush vetoes bill to limit CIA interrogation methods, says:

Quote:

President George W. Bush further cemented his legacy of fighting for strong executive powers, using his veto to halt a congressional effort to limit the CIA's latitude to subject terrorism suspects to harsh interrogation techniques.

Oh, gee, he's fighting for the Presidency to have more power? How noble of him! Um, should that extend to the right for the President to authorize or commit illegal acts? Because that's exactly what's going on here, is the President is acting to support illegal acts (torture) which are abhorrent worldwide.

Quote:

The director of the CIA, Mike Hayden, was swift to praise the Bush veto, arguing that the field manual was inappropriate as a guide for the CIA as the two institutions "have different missions, different capabilities and therefore difference procedures".

Uh, does a specific law become invalid in specific circumstances? In other words, if you're a trained race car driver is it then legal for you to drive 100 miles/hr in rush hour traffic? No, it's just as illegal to break the speed limit if you're a race car driver or if you're an 80 yr old half blind retiree. Therefore CIA Director Hayden is, uh, full of it.

Quote:

The veto throws the spotlight back on to America's use of so-called coercive interrogation methods like waterboarding, the simulated drowning technique invented by Spanish inquisitors and adopted by regimes such as the Khmer Rouge.

Put's us in great company... eh? NOT. Look, if America is to live up to the ideal we believe in then we must outlaw torture and make it stick. We cannot let this "President" run roughshod on the law.

Article Reference: 

Bush: Limiting CIA Interrogations "Could Cost American Lives"

Text: Bush on Veto of Intelligence Bill

ACLU Condemns Bush Veto Of Intelligence Bill Preventing Torture

Bush Explains Veto of Waterboarding Bill

Bush vetoes bill to limit CIA interrogation methods

Veto of Bill on C.I.A. Tactics Affirms Bush’s Legacy

Bush Vetoes Bill That Would Have Barred Waterboarding (Update2)

Bush vetoes move to ban water torture

President George Bush vetoes Congress ban on CIA use of waterboarding

Bush veto keeps torture techniques on the board

Reaction to Bush's Veto of Torture Bill

Bush vetoes U.S. bill outlawing CIA waterboarding

Bush vetoes interrogation limits

The Torturous Logic of The New York Times

Waterboarding, ‘Harsh’ Techniques OK by Bush

Bush Supports Undifferentiated Tortures, Even as “The People” Explicitly Do Not

extvideo: 

CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July

This is one of the significant bits of news which point to possible Bush Administration complicity in the September 11, 2001 attacks. This Guardian (of London) article from November 2001 states that "Two months before September 11 Osama bin Laden flew to Dubai for 10 days for treatment at the American hospital, where he was visited by the local CIA agent, according to the French newspaper Le Figaro.... Bin Laden is reported to have arrived in Dubai on July 4 from Quetta in Pakistan with his own personal doctor, nurse and four bodyguards, to be treated in the urology department. While there he was visited by several members of his family and Saudi personalities, and the CIA.... The CIA chief was seen in the lift, on his way to see Bin Laden, and later, it is alleged, boasted to friends about his contact. He was recalled to Washington soon afterwards."

In general the article undermines the claim that Osama bin Laden has been cut off from the Saudi leading families. Supposedly when Osama bin Laden became a radical extremist he was cut off from his family and the Saudi officialdom shunned him, banning him from returning to Saudi Arabia. Supposedly. However this article as well as many others show that there are continuous contacts between Osama bin Laden, his family, and prominent Saudi people.

The particular consternating question is if CIA agents had contact with Osama bin Laden in July 2001, then why didn't we do something about him? At that time he was sought over responsibility over several previous attacks against the U.S., such as the bombing's in Kenya and of the U.S.S. Cole.

Article Reference: 

CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July

extvideo: 

Impeach NOW, Cheney first then Bush

Section: Impeach Cheney and Bush

Kucinich: Effort to Impeach Vice President Cheney Still Alive (digg) is an interview of Kucinich on Democracy Now. He has some juicy things to say.

National Lawyers Guild Unanimously Passes Impeachment Resolution; Launches National Impeachment Committee & Campaign (digg) Is a truly excellent statement of the reasons for impeachment. This is not Kucinich's articles of impeachment, but ones written by the National Lawyers Guild. They do a stunningly accurate and complete recounting of why Cheney and Bush must go. Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors is Kucinich's impeachment resolution.. why is his citing fewer causes for impeachment?

Iraq Deja Vu: Cheney Manipulating Intelligence on Iran (digg), CHENEY IS LYING ABOUT INTELLIGENCE...AGAIN! (digg), Spooks refuse to toe Cheney's line on Iran (digg) is an indication of the danger of leaving Cheney in office. He is leading the charge to create a war in Iran using the same pattern of lies and deceit used to create the war in Iraq.

Impeaching Cheney is a Slam Dunk�..then why is Congress BLOWING IT! (digg) Read the NLG articles of impeachment.. it is incredibly damning.

Conyers Introduces Bills to Censure Bush and Cheney [2005] (digg) Before the 2006 elections Conyers was hot to impeach and of course facing lots of criticism, but still moving on making impeachment happen. Should Impeachment Be Off the Table? A Debate with Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan, (digg) But today he's being 'pragmatic' and saying winning the 2008 election is more important. Uh...

Take Action to Impeach Cheney for 9/11 Crimes! (digg)

Official Release on Kucinich's .GOV domain : Cheney's going to face a vote (digg), It's Time to Impeach Cheney

Suddenly, Impeachment Hearings are Starting to Look Likely (digg)

The only presidential candidates with foresight to oppose Iraq war in 2002. Kucinich, that is.

Revisiting the Declaration of Independence (digg) was written by me on July 4, 2007, comparing and contrasting the Declaration of Independence with todays events. It is astonishing.

Support HR 333 - Impeach Cheney! With their eyes on the 2008 elections, the Democratic party is handing Bush victory after victory and becoming complicit in the criminal actions of the administration.

Kucinich to Move Impeachment of Bush After Cheney

“People Don’t Know What the Constitution Means” Interesting point that Kucinich's articles of impeachment are weak and include provisions which would cause Congress to have to impeach themselves. Articles 2 and 3 of Kucinich's bill is about actions by the Bush administration which Congress has endorsed by passing laws to retroactively approve them. This is part of the overall issue, that Congress is making themselves complicit in the crimes.

Contact House Judiciary Committee Members Today to Impeach Dick Cheney! is a list of the critical Congresspeople for the Impeachment resolution to move forward.

Organize World Wide Impeachment call is a plan kind of like Arlo Guthrie's idea at the end of Alices Restaurent to end the Vietnam War. Hey everybody, call up Conyers and say IMPEACH.

Don't Impeach Bush and Cheney for Their Past, Impeach them for the Future. Impeachment is a big step, don't do it lightly. Do it for the future of the country.

Pelosi's Stand Blocking Impeachment in the House is Killing the Democratic Party I think the Democratic party win last year represented people who were wanting revolution, and Pelosi gave them capitulation. We the people are understandably upset.

Wexler (FL-19) v. Wasserman Schultz (FL-20) on Impeachment Coverage on dailykos.com of the rationale the Democratic Party is using to capitulate.

Kucinich Gambit Shows Who's Who This is another rundown of who's in favor or not, and shows which of the congresspeople to target. This analysis correlates members of the Judiciary committee with the supporters of the Kucinich resolution with their votes on certain measures.

8 Common Myths About Impeachment... and Why They're Not True (digg) A study of myths about what might happen from impeachment, and why they're not true.

Germany then, Iraq now: On the interpretation of nightmares (digg) A book about the history of Germany leading to WWII has eerie parallels, unexpected by the author of the book, with the leadup to the Iraq war. History repeats itself unless we learn from it.

Links: 

Impeaching Richard B. Cheney, Vice President of the United States, for high crimes and misdemeanors

Links: 

National Lawyers Guild Unanimously Passes Impeachment Resolution; Launches National Impeachment Committee & Campaign

Links: 

Kucinich: Effort to Impeach Vice President Cheney Still Alive

Links: 

Iraq Deja Vu: Cheney Manipulating Intelligence on Iran

Links: 

Spooks refuse to toe Cheney's line on Iran

Links: 

Impeaching Cheney is a Slam Dunk�..then why is Congress BLOWING IT!

Links: 

Take Action to Impeach Cheney for 9/11 Crimes!

Links: 

Official Release on Kucinich's .GOV domain : Cheney's going to face a vote

Links: 

Suddenly, Impeachment Hearings are Starting to Look Likely

Links: 

he only presidential candidates with foresight to oppose Iraq war in 2002.

Links: 

Should Impeachment Be Off the Table? A Debate with Peace Mom Cindy Sheehan

Links: 

Conyers Introduces Bills to Censure Bush and Cheney [2005]

Links: 

Revisiting the Declaration of Independence

Links: 

Section: Impeach Cheney and Bush

Links: 

Support HR 333 - Impeach Cheney!

Links: 

It's Time to Impeach Cheney

Links: 

Kucinich to Move Impeachment of Bush After Cheney

Links: 

“People Don’t Know What the Constitution Means”

Links: 

Contact House Judiciary Committee Members Today to Impeach Dick Cheney!

Links: 

Olbermann and Maddow Talk Cheney Impeachment

Links: 

Organize World Wide Impeachment call

Links: 

Don't Impeach Bush and Cheney for Their Past, Impeach them for the Future.

Links: 

Pelosi's Stand Blocking Impeachment in the House is Killing the Democratic Party

Links: 

Wexler (FL-19) v. Wasserman Schultz (FL-20) on Impeachment

Links: 

Kucinich Gambit Shows Who's Who

Links: 

8 Common Myths About Impeachment... and Why They're Not True

Links: 

Germany then, Iraq now: On the interpretation of nightmares

External Media

Sorry, you need to install flash to see this content.

Fallujah "liberated", supposedly

Troops Battle for Last Parts Of Fallujah
Senior Iraqi Officials Claim City Is Liberated


By Jackie Spinner and Karl Vick
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, November 14, 2004; Page A01

The U.S. military has declared Fallujah "liberated", but there is still intense fighting going on. The last "pocket of resistance" is "surprisingly" well organized in a way similar to a regular army. Oh, and violence has increased in other parts of Iraq, seemingly because some who were in Fallujah have left to take up the fight elsewhere.

Zarqawi, the main target of this offensive, was nowhere to be found. Hmmm...

Iraqi rebels slip away to fight another day

By Aqeel Hussein in al-Nouaimia and Toby Harnden in Fallujah

(Filed: 14/11/2004) (telegraph.co.uk)

So much for capturing the bulk of the resistance.

Families fleeing the besieged city of Fallujah say that rebel fighters have slipped through the American and Iraqi military cordon and have been driven away in Mercedes cars to rejoin the battle elsewhere in Iraq.

The fighters, said to include foreign militants using satellite telephones, are believed to be heading for Baghdad and the northern city of Mosul, to open a new front.

Regardless of anything else, the fighting was rough:


55 US Soldiers Killed This Week

At least 34 killed in Fallujah alone

by Michael Ewens (antiwar.com; November 14, 2004)
The most telling sentence is:

[the military] continues to pursue policies that suppose there exists a static number of Iraqis willing to fight the occupation: if they could only kill them all, democracy and calm would flourish. Of course, it is more likely that these incursions will create more insurgency.

More missteps - Falluja attack prompts Sunni's to withdraw from government

The following is a roundup of todays news regarding Iraq. Over the past 2-3 days the assault on Fallujah was launched by U.S. forces, supposedly assisted by the new Iraq army. The purpose is to quash the "rebellion" in Fallujah so that fair and open elections can be democratically held. Rumsfeld is expecting this to "tip" Fallujah over to "our side", and presumably to cause the rest of Iraq to come to "our" side".

Instead we see in the articles below the immediate and harsh reaction by at least one Sunni political party to withdraw their support from the Iraq government. We see much bloodshed, and we know from the past that bloodshed and fighting has only turned into more anger and resentment by the Iraqi's. It is the bloodshed and fighting which fuels the resistance movement, by inciting the people to join the resistance.

In the time.com article, they quote the Marine Sgt. Major as equating this with the U.S. Marine assault on Hue (Vietnam, 1968). While that assault was a military success in a similar situation to the assault on Fallujah (both cities held by "insurgents", destablising the attempt to install democracy), and while the assault on Hue was a military victory, it only worsened the Vietnam situation. In the larger picture, the assault on Hue was the tipping point of losing Vietnam. We have all the earmarkings that this assault on Fallujah will only worsen the Iraq situation.

From before the invasion of Iraq I've been shaking my head over this thought that one can "install" democracy. I think a country needs to choose democracy, not have it forced upon them, especially with guns pointing at them. The core feature of democracy is that the people rule the country jointly, and forcing democracy onto a people is the antithesis of the concept of the people jointly ruling a country.

Rumsfeld Looks to Military Success to 'Tip' Iraqi Opinion


Defense secretary argues that routing insurgents could persuade public to back interim leadership.

By Mark Mazzetti, LA Times Staff Writer

November 9, 2004; LATimes.com

WASHINGTON — U.S. troops captured Saddam Hussein, killed his much-loathed sons and handed power over to an Iraqi interim government. But none of that succeeded in tipping Iraqi public opinion decisively in favor of the United States.

Now, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and other officials say they are hoping that crushing militants in Fallouja will serve as a milestone for winning the backing of the Iraqi public and deflating the lethal insurgency.

The Grim Calculations of Retaking Fallujah


Capturing the city could mean a Sunni election boycott, but leaving it in rebel hands would also jeopardize the poll

By TONY KARON (time.com, Monday, Nov. 08, 2004)

Allawi plays for high stakes using force to ensure elections


By Anton La Guardia, Diplomatic Editor
(Filed: November 9, 2004) (London Telegraph)

During a surprise visit to members of Iraq's new army he (Allawi) said he had personally authorised US forces to clean Fallujah of terrorists.

...Mr Allawi said the attack in Fallujah and the security measures were designed to restore order before Iraq's elections next January.

He is playing for high stakes. If coalition forces are successful in Fallujah, he will have taken an important step in asserting his government authority.

But if the operation fails, or causes heavy civilian casualties, the prime minister could ignite greater resistance.

US looking to Allawi to avoid repeat of last aborted Fallujah offensive
turkishpress.com

WASHINGTON, Nov 8 (AFP) - The US military was forced to abort its first attempt to retake the restive Iraqi city of Fallujah in April. Now it is counting on Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi to avoid a repeat as it sends troops back into the insurgent-held city.

U.S. forces launch ground assault on Fallujah
By Associated Press, 11/8/2004 11:29 (boston.com)

U.S. forces storm into northern districts of Fallujah, opening major assault on insurgent stronghold
By Jim Krane, Associated Press, 11/8/2004 15:14 (boston.com)

Fallujah has painful history at hands of British, U.S. forces
Stronghold has become symbol of insurgency
By Agence France Presse (AFP) Tuesday, November 09, 2004 (The Daily Star, Lebanon)

By striking at this city that has come to symbolize resistance in Iraq, the U.S.-led forces and Iraqi Prime Minister Iyad Allawi are hoping to break the back of the insurgency so key elections can go ahead more peacefully in January.

...Fallujah, located in the restive mainly Sunni province of Al-Anbar, has a bitter history with the American and British forces.

It has painful memories of its time under British mandate in the 1920's and was also bombed during the 1991 Gulf War.

Overlooked, or perhaps avoided during the war, the city has always simmered - too much to ignore but not enough to require crushing - since the invasion to oust Saddam Hussein in March last year.

Relations with the Americans really deteriorated in April 2003 when U.S. troops opened fire on protesters who demanded that U.S. soldiers not use a school as a base. At least 17 Iraqis were killed.

Missiles rain indiscriminately on Fallujah
November 09 2004 at 02:02AM (Independant online, South Africa)

Fallujah becomes 'like hell'
09/11/2004 07:54 - (news24.com, South Africa)

Fallujah - The skies over Fallujah lit up from the flashes of air and artillery barrages as United States troops launched an offensive to seize key insurgent strongholds in a city that became the major sanctuary for Islamic extremists who fought marines to a standstill last April.

Sunni party withdraws from Iraqi government in protest over Fallujah

By Sameer N. Yacoub, Associated Press, 11/9/2004 02:31

and, in Washington Post

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) A major Sunni political party has quit the interim Iraqi government and revoked its single minister from the Cabinet in protest over the U.S. assault on the insurgent stronghold of Fallujah, the party's leader said Tuesday.

The Iraqi Islamic Party wields significant influence over the country's Sunni community and its withdrawal from the government will likely be a blow to Interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.

"We are protesting the attack on Fallujah and the injustice that is inflicted on the innocent people of the city," said Mohsen Abdel-Hamid, head of the Iraqi Islamic Party.

...

Sunni clerics call for boycott of January elections because of Fallujah attack
By Associated Press, 11/9/2004 09:53 (boston.com)

BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) A powerful group of Sunni Muslim clerics called Tuesday for a boycott of national elections set for late January ... The group's director, Harith al-Dhari, said the election was being held "over the corpses of those killed in Fallujah and the blood of the wounded."

Fallujah a city of mosques and resistance


Posted on Sun, Nov. 07, 2004

Residents mostly strict Muslims

The Associated Press

Fallujah calls itself the “City of Mosques

Battle for Falluja - just days after election

Just in time for it to not affect the election results, we have this:

Battle for Falluja begins
Monday, November 8, 2004 Posted: 2:03 PM EST (1903 GMT)

The election was finalized on November 4, the invasion of Falluja begain on November 8. The administration would likely have us believe this is a coincidence, but I think not. It's raw politicized conniving, that's what it is.

NY Times analyzes the Al Qaqaa videotape

Earlier I noted that the Minneapolis ABC affiliate had broadcast video of soldiers in Al Qaqaa going through bunkers looking at the weapons. The NY Times has now analyzed the video, verifying that it showed the HMX explosives everybody is concerned about. Plus, it showed the UN "seal" which the inspectors had left behind.

Meaning, the U.S. soldiers shown on the videotape broke in, breaking the UN seal, the seal that was supposed to keep the site safe. They probably didn't know what they were doing. And, for that matter, the UN seal shown is a spindly thing that probably wasn't clearly marked as to what it was, so the soldiers probably didn't think much of it.

See here:

Video Shows G.I.'s at Weapon Cache


By WILLIAM J. BROAD and DAVID E. SANGER

Published: October 29, 2004
(NY Times)

The article gives a good timeline of the events.:

The agency said that when it left Iraq in mid-March, only days before the war began, the only bunkers bearing its seals at the huge complex contained the explosive known as HMX, which the agency had monitored because it could be used in a nuclear weapons program.

In mid-march the explosives were seen there, and sealed by the UN inspectors. The seal pictured in the article isn't very much, but it would show if the building had been entered because one would be unable to enter without breaking the seal.

Yesterday evening, the Pentagon released a satellite image of the complex taken just two days after the inspectors left, showing a few trucks parked in front of some bunkers. It is not clear they are the bunkers with the high explosives.

The Iraqi's had some activity at Al Qaqaa, but it's unclear what it was they were doing. There was apparently other weaponry on the site and the simplest conclusion is they were retrieving that in preparation for the invasion they knew the U.S. was about to launch.

The videotape , taken by KSTP-TV, an ABC affiliate in Minneapolis-St. Paul, shows troops breaking into a bunker and opening boxes and examining barrels. ...
The ABC crew said the video was taken on April 18.

The videotape verifies the explosives were there, on site, after the invasion. This disproves the administration's claim/excuse that the Iraqi government removed the HMX before the invasion, because it was still there afterward.

Then they headed north to Baghdad, and the site was apparently left unguarded. By the time special weapons teams returned to Al Qaqaa in May, the explosives were apparently gone.

Then in mid-May the U.S. special weapons team went to the scene, and the explosives were gone. Because of the videotape we know they must have disappeared between April 19 and mid-May. And we know looters were active at this site just as they were all over the country.

As the article says, the timing is critical. This issue has become key in the presidential race, with the Bush side disclaiming responsibility saying that not all the facts are in. Well, it is clear to me that enough facts are in. And that you, Mr. President, are caught redhanded in criminal negligence.

The now-missing explosives were seen during invasion

The ultra-high explosives that has been the subject this week were in fact seen by the invading U.S. forces, and filmed by one of the embedded news crews. They just released the tape.

EXCLUSIVE:
5 EYEWITNESS NEWS video may be linked to missing explosives in Iraq Apologies for the hype, but this is a local TV station in Minneapolis and it was their news crew apparently who did the filming. story here

The filming was done on April 18, 2003 according to the news report. While they don't have a positive identification that what they filmed is the now-missing explosive, the description makes it likely.

So far as I'm concerned, it's just another nail in the coffin of the credibility (or lack thereof) of the Bush administration.

Except... what about this statement by a U.S. State department official?


Russia tied to Iraq's missing arms

(By Bill Gertz; THE WASHINGTON TIMES; Published October 28, 2004)

John A. Shaw, the deputy undersecretary of defense for international technology security, said in an interview that he believes the Russian troops, working with Iraqi intelligence, "almost certainly" removed the high-explosive material that went missing from the Al-Qaqaa facility, south of Baghdad.

"The Russians brought in, just before the war got started, a whole series of military units," Mr. Shaw said. "Their main job was to shred all evidence of any of the contractual arrangements they had with the Iraqis. The others were transportation units."

...and...

Al-Qaqaa, a known Iraqi weapons site, was monitored closely, Mr. Shaw said.
"That was such a pivotal location, Number 1, that the mere fact of [special explosives] disappearing was impossible," Mr. Shaw said. "And Number 2, if the stuff disappeared, it had to have gone before we got there."

er... okay.... so what about the news crew that apparantly filmed the explosives on April 18? If this was such an important site, then why is there news article after news article quoting military commanders saying they drove by the Al Qaqaa but didn't have orders to check the place out or secure it?

Such as ...

No Check of Bunker, Unit Commander Says



By JIM DWYER and DAVID E. SANGER

Published: October 27, 2004
(NY Times)

The commander, Col. Joseph Anderson, of the Second Brigade of the Army's 101st Airborne Division, said he did not learn until this week that the site, Al Qaqaa, was considered sensitive, or that international inspectors had visited it before the war began in 2003 to inspect explosives that they had tagged during a decade of monitoring.

Colonel Anderson, who is now the chief of staff for the division and who spoke by telephone from Fort Campbell, Ky., said his troops had been driving north toward Baghdad and had paused at Al Qaqaa to make plans for their next push.

"We happened to stumble on it,'' he said. "I didn't know what the place was supposed to be. We did not get involved in any of the bunkers. It was not our mission. It was not our focus. We were just stopping there on our way to Baghdad. The plan was to leave that very same day. The plan was not to go in there and start searching. It looked like all the other ammunition supply points we had seen already."

And this...

4 Iraqis Tell of Looting at Munitions Site in '03


By JAMES GLANZ and JIM DWYER

Published: October 28, 2004
(NY Times)

The Iraqis described an orgy of theft so extensive that enterprising residents rented their trucks to looters. But some looting was clearly indiscriminate, with people grabbing anything they could find and later heaving unwanted items off the trucks.

...The mechanic, Ahmed Saleh Mezher, said employees asked the Americans to protect the site but were told this was not the soldiers' responsibility.

... But the accounts make clear that what set off much if not all of the looting was the arrival and swift departure of American troops, who did not secure the site after inducing the Iraqi forces to abandon it.

"The looting started after the collapse of the regime," said Wathiq al-Dulaimi, a regional security chief, who was based nearby in Latifiya. But once it had begun, he said, the booty streamed toward Baghdad.

...Mr. Mezher, the mechanic, said it took the looters about two weeks to disassemble heavy machinery at the site and carry that off after the smaller items were gone.

Like I said, the Bush administration is suffering from a lack of credibility. They have for a long time.