Free Iraq

Soldiers in Humvees (above): Such utter contemptible arrogance. They do think they own the country.
 

US to make public key judgements of Iraq intel assessment: ... which reportedly warns of a strong chance the situation on the ground will grow worse.

Titled "Prospects for Iraq's Stability: A Challenging Road Ahead," the assessment comes amid intense debate over Bush's decision to send more than 21,500 additional troops to Iraq.


U.S. intelligence says "civil war" describes Iraq


Military says helicopter down in Iraq: ... no details on possible casualties, what mission the helicopter was supporting, nor how many were in the crew.
 

Army division orders departing soldiers to stay put (So we can 'win' in Iraq.)
 

Chris Floyd, All Along the Watchtower: The Firestorm of New War is Almost Upon Us: When wise man Robert Parry worries, we worry too. According to Parry, who exposed some of the earliest tentacles of the Iran-Contra octopus and has gone on to score scoop after scoop on the depradations of the Bush Faction (Poppy and Junior branches), his military and intelligence sources say that the Bush plans for an attack on Iran (mostly likely in conjunction with Israel) are accelerating at break-neck speed, and could be launched as soon as this month.

These are dark days, and they are about to get darker. Yet in this desperate hour, we are led by nothing but fools and cranks and cowards, on every side, as the riders -- the pale riders -- are approaching. (emphasis added)
 

Watchdog attacks US swoop for bank secrets: In a damning report on the covert transfer to US agencies of the details of millions of financial transactions by EU citizens, Peter Hustinx, the European Data Protection supervisor, accused the European Central Bank of complicity in the system that has been used since 9/11 and which was deemed illegal by European data protection agencies two months ago.
 

BBC Speculates Blair in Middle of "Watergate-style cover-up"


Defiant Blair rejects quit calls: "I am not going to beg for my character in front of anyone. People can make up their own mind about me." (I have, Tony.)
 

Exxon Mobil Posts Record $39.5 billion Annual Profit
 

Spy plane hunts 'terror suspects': The aircraft can monitor computer and mobile telephone communications and long wave radios.
 

CRIMES AND CORRUPTIONS OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS, U.S. troops kept Iraqi brains in fridge as trophies: In an unprecedented two-day Citizens' Hearing held over January 20-21, more than 600 citizens joined a distinguished tribunal panel in listening to testimony about the legality of the US invasion of Iraq. The Citizens' Hearing was convened to present evidence that Lt. Ehren Watada would have presented in his February 5 court martial on the question that the military ruled barred from entry on Jan. 16 - the question of the Iraq War's legality. Lt. Watada has repeatedly asserted that because the Iraq War is illegal, it is his duty to refuse orders to deploy. He is the Army's first commissioned officer to take such a stand.
 

Sailors at Lemoore air base ship out on short notice to USS Reagan carrier: While the Reagan is scheduled to tour the western Pacific, destinations for aircraft carriers can change rapidly, ... .

The Stennis is headed to the Persian Gulf and the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower is near the African coast, ... .

"They go wherever they're needed," ... . "The world situation could change."
 

Clinton, Edwards Will Square Off At AIPAC Tonight: "When it comes to important gatherings like this, there is going to be a lot of pressure on the major candidates to not let one of their competitors have the room to themselves," a Democratic strategist, Daniel Gerstein, said.

Tonight's event is the first time any of the 2008 candidates have competed for attention in the same room since they launched their campaigns in earnest. It is also an important illustration of just how much stock all of the presidential candidates, Democrats and Republicans alike, will put in the pro- Israel community, particularly for campaign dollars.
 

Jerusalem Post, US strike group transits Suez Canal: The Navy is in the midst of a regional buildup, with the group of the aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis on its way as well as 21,500 US soldiers being sent to Iraq. The carrier USS Dwight D. Eisenhower is already in the region.

The United States has not had two carriers in the Mideast since the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003.

The Bataan will join a second amphibious assault ship, the USS Boxer, which was on port visit in Dubai on Tuesday.
 

Aljazeera.com, The real story of what happened in Najaf: Al-Hatami and al-Khazaali leaders believe that the bloody attacks near Najaf were carried out by government-backed troops to fuel the sectarian strife between the Shias and Sunnis in the area.

"Our convoy was close to al-Hatami convoy on the way to Najaf when we heard the massive shooting, and so we ran to help them because our tribe and theirs are bound with a strong alliance," IPS quoted a 45-year-old member of the al-Khazali tribe as saying.

"Our two tribes have a strong belief that Iranians are provoking sectarian war in Iraq which is against the belief of all Muslims, and so we announced an alliance with Sunni brothers against any sectarian violence in the country. That did not make our Iranian-dominated government happy."

IPS also quoted Jassim Abbas, a farmer from the area, as saying that "American helicopters participated in the operation".

"They were soon there to kill those pilgrims without hesitation, but they were never there for helping Iraqis in anything they need. We just watched them getting killed group by group while trapped in those plantations."

Eyewitnesses on the other hand reported that most of the victims were killed by U.S. and British warplanes.

U.S. officials hailed the courage and ferocity of Iraqi soldiers, most of whom are Shias, for confronting Shia "gunmen", with Col. Michael Garrett, commander of the 4th Brigade Combat Team (Airborne), 25th Infantry Division, saying "the aggressive manner in which the Iraqi soldiers performed north of Najaf going after the anti-Iraqi forces was impressive".

Clearly, however, the U.S. and the puppet Iraqi government have failed to get the Iraqis to believe the tale of the battle in Najaf, and the cult which they allege has links to Al Qaeda in Iraq.
 

xymphora, The Big Plan:The Conservative government in Canada has effectively renounced Kyoto, for the simple reason that extraction of the oil from the oil sands is impossible under Kyoto. ...

The United States can’t invade Canada – too many white people – but it doesn’t need to. With the Canadian government one third in the pocket of the American government, one third in the pocket of the Calgary oil barons ... and one third in the pocket of the Jewish Billionaires Club (I note that the Canada oil plan conforms to the Zionist plan to remove the ‘oil weapon’ from opponents of Zionist colonialism), there simply isn’t any room left for the government of Canada to look out for the interests of Canadians. It’s not just Canadians who will pay the price, as the upshot of the degree of oil sands exploitation anticipated by the Bush Administration ... is the destruction of the world.
 

The U.S Congress Democratic Caucus president Rahm Emanuel would be Israeli military intelligence officer


Ten-year old girl brain dead after Israel border police shooting


Jerusalem Post, Palestinians: 'Ethnic cleansing' in Iraq


Cheney's Handwritten Notes Implicate Bush in Plame Affair ('Common sense' does, as well.)


RUMOR IS, "U.S. TO ATTACK IRAN ON/BY FEB 24th...."
 

Another U.S. helicopter lost in Iraq: A U.S. Army helicopter crashed Friday in a hail of gunfire north of Baghdad, police and witnesses said — the fourth lost in Iraq in the last two weeks. The U.S. command said two crew members were killed, and the top U.S. general conceded that insurgent ground fire has become more effective.
 

Students accept Carter challenge: Members of the Brandeis community are working to fund a “community delegation” to the West Bank, sources say. The two initiatives come weeks after former President Jimmy Carter challenged the university during his Jan. 23 speech to “visit the occupied territories for a few days… to determine whether I have exaggerated or incorrectly described the plight of the Palestinians” in his controversial book Palestine Peace Not Apartheid.

(Do you suppose they'll be allowed in?)
 

Pepe Escobar, A massacre and a new civil war: The massacre that occurred in Najaf, Iraq, last Sunday by now has been wildly deconstructed over the Arab press. What emerges has virtually nothing to do with the official Baghdad and Washington spin of Iraqi troops killing 250-odd heavily armed apocalyptic cultists dubbed "Soldiers of Heaven". ...

The Najaf governor's first intervention was to scream that Najaf was being attacked by al-Qaeda. Official spin painted the guerrillas as Sunni Arabs sprinkled with al-Qaeda-style Arab Afghans. Muaffaq al-Rubaii, Iraq's national security adviser, was quick to announce that "hundreds of Arabs" - he mentioned Saudis, Yemenis, Egyptians and Afghans - had been killed. Then the Najaf governor said that "British and Arab passports" were found in the battlefield, proving interference by "a certain neighboring Arab country" (he didn't specify which). And finally, he decided to change his story from al-Qaeda to the "Soldiers of Heaven", fanatical Shi'ites who happened to be supported during the 1990s by none other than Saddam Hussein and were now being helped by evil Ba'athists.

In this sorry attempt by the Iraqi government to create a one-size-fits-all conspiracy (Saddamists, al-Qaeda and Iranian fanatics all in cahoots), the main problem is how to fit in current US anti-Iran hysteria. The Mahdawiya have never had anything to do with Iran. This is a nationalist Iraqi group: no wonder they are fiercely opposed to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, who is Iranian, born in Sistan-Balochistan province.

Both the Hawatim and Khazaali tribes are fiercely Iraqi Arab nationalist. They are fiercely against both the SCIRI and Da'wa - that is, the governments of Najaf and Baghdad, which for them are puppets of Iran. The Mahdawiya for its part was based in Zarga. They could have easily been set up as the fall guys in the massacre. Nothing could be more convenient than blaming it all on a fanatical, anti-government Shi'ite cult. But a consensus emerging among southern Iraqi tribes is that the massacre was a Baghdad-concocted operation designed to torpedo an increasingly popular, non-sectarian Sunni and Shi'ite Iraqi nationalist alliance (anti-US and anti-Iran).

What is certain is that the Maliki-Hakim alliance will continue to deploy its US-trained Iraqi army and police in further massacres, advised by the dreaded Scorpion commando squad, which is funded by US dollars, and responding to the head of Iraqi intelligence. In this sense, the Najaf massacre is also a classic case of the "Salvador option" in its Iraqified version: or how the lessons of Latin America in the 1970s and 1980s are useful for the "New Middle East".

Furthermore, the massacre also signals that the Pentagon is now linked to killing Arab Shi'ite tribes. If this is true, it is a big mistake. Sistani does not control them anymore. This means more and more revengeful, nationalist Arab Shi'ites will be amplifying another anti-US/Baghdad guerrilla front.

Take the example of the Beni Tamim, a mixed Sunni and Shi'ite tribe. Their sheikh, 70-year-old Hamid al-Suhail, was killed one month ago in Baghdad by a death squad. Revenge is inevitable. Anti-US and anti-Baghdad guerrillas in southern Iraq have been spreading like wildfire since November.

The model is to be found in modern history: the Shi'ite resistance that from the 1920s to the 1930s fought and kicked out the British. Southern Shi'ite tribal chiefs are going for a united, Sunni and Shi'ite muqawama (resistance). The Bush administration is reaping the kind of Iraqi chaos it craves: yet one more civil war - of (Arab) Shi'ites against ("Persian") Shi'ites.
 

Pentagon alters how wounded are calculated: Statistics on a Pentagon Web site have been reorganized in a way that lowers the published totals of American nonfatal casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
 

Maleiha Malik, Muslims are now getting the same treatment Jews had a century ago: Today's anti-Muslim racism uncannily echoes earlier anti-semitism - both minorities abused as an alien security threat
 

"I think that the rules stated are true everywhere. We don't recognize them here because family an community relationships in this country are weak. So, when people follow these rules, they are operating with different groups for different reasons, and the result is somewhat chaotic. This is not empowering for people at the bottom of the food chain, so to speak. I think there is a much bigger flaw in his argument than just the mistaken idea that the people in Iraq have a different set of survival rules that we do rather than just a different set of structures through which they are enabled. That is the assumption that they are the violent ones, and that the only way they know to play out their power struggle is through violence, and if we leave with our violence, with our guns and tanks that they will become even more violent. I don't believe this is true. Yes there will be residual violent rituals to play out whenever we leave. We set the pot spinning with guns and tanks and keep it going with a somewhat ambivalent support for the Shia, and an even bigger sense of self interest that has lead to midnight raids on peoples homes and violent attacks on random Iraqi civilians who are either in the way, or convenient targets or misconstrued as whomever is designated as the enemy du jour. It is not surprising that violence is perceived to be the way to power in this context.

It is true that many of the players we know about and think we understand are manipulating the occupying powers. What else would you expect them to do? Just let us tell them what to do? Treat us as saviors and wise gurus when we are there recklessly destroying the countryside, randomly attacking their people and preparing to make a nest for ourselves so we can bleed off their resources in the most convenient and comfortable way possible? Of course they are trying to manipulate the situation to advantage. What do you think the Saudis and Jordanian governments are doing? Are they really a reflection of our own interests, or are they using us so they can manage their own affairs to their own advantage?

But of course, the ones we really fear and distrust, the ones we accuse of the worst intentions are those darned militias and their leaders that just want us to leave so they can govern their own affairs. I have read through your comments and what I see in general is that no one much thinks the Iraqis can sort our their own problems. But that is really more true of us than them. We can't sort out their problems because we don't have their interest in mind, and we don't know or care what those interests might be. This is scary even for those of us who are inclined to good will and would like to see a benevolent situation. We really don't know what to do. They, on the other hand, know exactly what they need. And they know that to create a center of power they have to work together. And they are the ones who will have to do it.

We have not so far given them a chance to demonstrate this potential. Saddam got power, at least in part, because we backed him (overtly and covertly). Meanwhile, when we don't feel like the government in power is going to advance our agenda, we get rid of it. And everyone over there knows it. We have done that in Iraq and Iran and all over the Middle East and South America throughout the last century. What could be more manipulative? We have used our overwhelming technological advantage to manipulate the entire region to our will, yet we call them manipulative (barbarians) because they try to use whatever means available to gain some advantage in this situation.

It seemed to me the Italian interview with Mukta al Sadr was really quite hopeful. I see more advanced progress in the coalitions forming around Hassan Nasrallah and Hizbollah in Lebanon. While we're busy setting Shia against Sunni and using every fundamentalist extremist we can find to keep the pot boiling, there are leaders willing to seek unity. We don't recognize them for a couple of reasons. First, we don't really have a clue of anything going on there. Second, they don't like us and they carry guns and are willing to use them to protect their people who are their families and neighbors and clans and whatever. If they couldn't do that, what kind of following could they keep. They dabble in the political process, but right now, there is now real power to be had in that domain, and no security and no resolution. We own the process, not them.

Yes, I know, supporting Hizbollah is heresy. Signora is our man, but after last summer, it isn't a surprise that he is no longer so popular with the people. After all, he was powerless to stop his western supporters from nearly destroying the country, and he reconciled with them as soon as the debacle was over. Even so, if he would join in with a Unity government and share power with the other elected officials, perhaps that would be the end of it. But no, we won't stand for it. He still has to assert the western agenda regardless of the will of the majority of the people to keep the support of his western backers, and so he refuses to participate in a unity government, claiming that the constitution doesn't require him to. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Iraq is merely a more aggravated example of a problem at large in the developing nations of the world. If we leave, it will become less aggravated. If we let power flow to the people who are capable of holding it independently and trust to nature and to human nature we can let go. They can solve the problems that we created for them because they have strong incentives to do so, their lives, their independence, their peace, their country.
Posted by: Judith at February 2, 2007 10:57 PM "

justworldnews
 

"I think that the rules stated are true everywhere. We don't recognize them here because family an community relationships in this country are weak. So, when people follow these rules, they are operating with different groups for different reasons, and the result is somewhat chaotic. This is not empowering for people at the bottom of the food chain, so to speak. I think there is a much bigger flaw in his argument than just the mistaken idea that the people in Iraq have a different set of survival rules that we do rather than just a different set of structures through which they are enabled. That is the assumption that they are the violent ones, and that the only way they know to play out their power struggle is through violence, and if we leave with our violence, with our guns and tanks that they will become even more violent. I don't believe this is true. Yes there will be residual violent rituals to play out whenever we leave. We set the pot spinning with guns and tanks and keep it going with a somewhat ambivalent support for the Shia, and an even bigger sense of self interest that has lead to midnight raids on peoples homes and violent attacks on random Iraqi civilians who are either in the way, or convenient targets or misconstrued as whomever is designated as the enemy du jour. It is not surprising that violence is perceived to be the way to power in this context.

It is true that many of the players we know about and think we understand are manipulating the occupying powers. What else would you expect them to do? Just let us tell them what to do? Treat us as saviors and wise gurus when we are there recklessly destroying the countryside, randomly attacking their people and preparing to make a nest for ourselves so we can bleed off their resources in the most convenient and comfortable way possible? Of course they are trying to manipulate the situation to advantage. What do you think the Saudis and Jordanian governments are doing? Are they really a reflection of our own interests, or are they using us so they can manage their own affairs to their own advantage?

But of course, the ones we really fear and distrust, the ones we accuse of the worst intentions are those darned militias and their leaders that just want us to leave so they can govern their own affairs. I have read through your comments and what I see in general is that no one much thinks the Iraqis can sort our their own problems. But that is really more true of us than them. We can't sort out their problems because we don't have their interest in mind, and we don't know or care what those interests might be. This is scary even for those of us who are inclined to good will and would like to see a benevolent situation. We really don't know what to do. They, on the other hand, know exactly what they need. And they know that to create a center of power they have to work together. And they are the ones who will have to do it.

We have not so far given them a chance to demonstrate this potential. Saddam got power, at least in part, because we backed him (overtly and covertly). Meanwhile, when we don't feel like the government in power is going to advance our agenda, we get rid of it. And everyone over there knows it. We have done that in Iraq and Iran and all over the Middle East and South America throughout the last century. What could be more manipulative? We have used our overwhelming technological advantage to manipulate the entire region to our will, yet we call them manipulative (barbarians) because they try to use whatever means available to gain some advantage in this situation.

It seemed to me the Italian interview with Mukta al Sadr was really quite hopeful. I see more advanced progress in the coalitions forming around Hassan Nasrallah and Hizbollah in Lebanon. While we're busy setting Shia against Sunni and using every fundamentalist extremist we can find to keep the pot boiling, there are leaders willing to seek unity. We don't recognize them for a couple of reasons. First, we don't really have a clue of anything going on there. Second, they don't like us and they carry guns and are willing to use them to protect their people who are their families and neighbors and clans and whatever. If they couldn't do that, what kind of following could they keep. They dabble in the political process, but right now, there is now real power to be had in that domain, and no security and no resolution. We own the process, not them.

Yes, I know, supporting Hizbollah is heresy. Signora is our man, but after last summer, it isn't a surprise that he is no longer so popular with the people. After all, he was powerless to stop his western supporters from nearly destroying the country, and he reconciled with them as soon as the debacle was over. Even so, if he would join in with a Unity government and share power with the other elected officials, perhaps that would be the end of it. But no, we won't stand for it. He still has to assert the western agenda regardless of the will of the majority of the people to keep the support of his western backers, and so he refuses to participate in a unity government, claiming that the constitution doesn't require him to. Sounds familiar, doesn't it?

Iraq is merely a more aggravated example of a problem at large in the developing nations of the world. If we leave, it will become less aggravated. If we let power flow to the people who are capable of holding it independently and trust to nature and to human nature we can let go. They can solve the problems that we created for them because they have strong incentives to do so, their lives, their independence, their peace, their country.
Posted by: Judith at February 2, 2007 10:57 PM "

justworldnews
 

Say,
I note the final paragraph of Judith's comment at 'Just World News' where she writes: "Iraq is merely a more aggravated example of a problem at large in the developing nations of the world."

I'm interested in any comment you might make on that particular statement. Thanks.
 

An appeal on behalf of the Iraqi people

Dear all,
Please circulate this appeal and get different organisations to sign it.
I will be receiving the signatures and forwarding the appeal to the UN, EU nd HR orgs.
We have just heard Syria has introduced visa restrictions on Iraqis.

The UNHCR are failing the Iraqis.
The UK and the US? they do not want to know.


To the Secretary General of the United Nations H.E. Ban Ki-moon,
To UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour
To the European Union Commissioner for Human Rights: Thomas Hammarberg
To all human rights and solidarity organizations
To all peace loving people of the world

We are writing to appeal to you on behalf of the Iraqi people on the receiving end of Mr. Bush’s new security plan for Baghdad and Anbar. The readiness of the US/Iraqi government forces, to use illegal acts of collective punishment does not inspire us with confidence and peace of mind.

As you read these lines, the city of Haditha in the Anbar province, a city that has suffered repeated attacks from US forces during 2006, has been under a medieval siege, for more than two months now, with food, water, electricity and fuel being cut off and movement inside the city has been restricted. Several messages of SOS were issued by residents of this city posted on the internet.

The residents of the three kilometer Haiffa Street in the centre of Baghdad have been suffering siege and aerial bombardment since the 10th January.
[ . . . ]

We appeal to you to use your good offices to put pressure on the US military and the Iraqi government to comply with International Humanitarian Law, to remind them international law prohibits acts of collective punishment.

We demand that members of the Iraqi Red Crescent are protected and granted unfettered access to Iraqi villages and neighbourhoods, in order to assist the sick, the displaced and the needy.

We echo the words of the Iraqi woman in the CNN report, 'the US occupation forces are not complying with the Geneva Convention, and they should leave Iraq'.
 

US occupation forces used cluster bombs against villagers today
 

Chávez makes a monkey of Bush: ... "more dangerous than a monkey with a razor blade".

"I pray to God for the people of the United States. I hope they're capable of liberating themselves from the tyranny they have. Who would be the greater fascist - Hitler or Bush? They might end up in a draw."
 

Accused terrorist Salah acquitted of charges: Mohammed Salah, the only U.S. citizen to be designated an international terrorist, was acquitted Thursday of terrorism-related charges - a rejection of the federal government's claim that he helped lead the militant Palestinian group Hamas.

Salah was captured by Israeli authorities in 1993 and accused of serving as a Hamas military commander, and he’s been dealing with the aftershocks ever since.

He was held without charges and interrogated over a period of nearly two months in Israel -- and defense attorneys repeatedly told jurors during the trial that Salah was tortured into saying what the Shin Bet wanted to hear.

A pair of Shin Bet agents involved in the interrogation, testifying under fake names in a courtroom cleared of the public, insisted that Salah’s confession was not coerced. But prosecutors admitted the Shin Bet in the early 1990s generally used harsh interrogation tactics considered by many human-rights observers to be torture.
 

Main Anti-war Group Plans June Rally Against Israeli Policies
 

Of Walls and Bantustans: Apartheid by Any Other Name: Israeli policy in the West Bank is a form of apartheid in intent and implementation. Ethnic-based, as opposed to race-based, it shares an important characteristic with the South African model.
 

Four children among the 17 dead as Gaza fire fights rage
 

John Pilger, Iran: The War Begins: ... For the Bush cabal, the attack will be a way of "buying time" for its dis aster in Iraq. In announcing what he called a "surge" of American troops in Iraq, George W Bush identified Iran as his real target. "We will interrupt the flow of support [to the insurgency in Iraq] from Iran and Syria," he said. "And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq."

As the American disaster in Iraq deepens and domestic and foreign opposition grows, "neo-con" fanatics such as Vice-President Dick Cheney believe their opportunity to control Iran's oil will pass unless they act no later than the spring. For public consumption, there are potent myths. In concert with Israel and Washington's Zionist and fundamentalist Christian lobbies, the Bushites say their "strategy" is to end Iran's nuclear threat.

The "threat" from Iran is entirely manufactured, aided and abetted by familiar, compliant media language that refers to Iran's "nuclear ambitions", just as the vocabulary of Saddam's non-existent WMD arsenal became common usage. ...

The one piece of "solid evidence" is the threat posed by the United States. An American naval build-up in the eastern Mediterranean has begun. This is almost certainly part of what the Pentagon calls CONPLAN, which is the aerial bombing of Iran. In 2004, National Security Presidential Directive 35, entitled "Nuclear Weapons Deployment Authorisation", was issued. It is classified, of course, but the presumption has long been that NSPD 35 authorised the stockpiling and deployment of "tactical" nuclear weapons in the Middle East.

The well-informed Arab Times in Kuwait says that Bush will attack Iran before the end of April. One of Russia's most senior military strategists, General Leonid Ivashov, says the US will use nuclear munitions delivered by cruise missiles launched from the Mediterranean. "The war in Iraq," he wrote on 24 January, "was just one element in a series of steps in the process of regional destabilisation.

In Britain, Downing Street has been presented with a document entitled Answering the Charges by Professor Abbas Edalat, of Imperial College London, on behalf of others seeking to expose the disinformation on Iran. Blair remains silent. Apart from the usual honourable exceptions, parliament remains shamefully silent, too.
 

JewishNews.com, Against pre-emptive holocaust in Iran
 

Kurt Nimmo, AIPAC “Money People” and the Iran Attack: It is precisely “pro-Israel,” “New York money people,” “influential in the Democratic Party” who are calling the shots, demanding Democrats “toe the line.” David Shipler, writing for the New Yorks Times in 1987, noted, AIPAC “has gained power to influence a presidential candidate’s choice of staff, to block practically any arms sale to an Arab country, and to serve as a catalyst for intimate military relations between the Pentagon and the Israeli army. Its leading officials are consulted by State Department and White House policy makers, by senators and generals.”

Since 1987, AIPAC—formerly the American Zionist Committee for Public Affairs—has increased its influence to such a degree that it runs the foreign policy of the United States, particularly in relation to issues concerning the Middle East. ...
 

Blood Money -
Pentagon wants $622.6 billion for 2008
 

(An extensive compilation)
Dick Eastman, Understanding What The Neocon-Zionists Have Done To Iraq And Iraqis While Earning Massive Wealth For Their Masters
 

From the 'Thinking' Man: ... "I took a lot of time thinking about how best to achieve an objective of a country governing, sustaining, and defending itself," ...

"There's also got to be success on the political front. They've got to pass an oil law. They've got to amend their constitution so that all segments of society believe the government is working. They've got to spend their money on reconstruction projects," the president said.

"There's benchmarks that they have got to achieve and I have made it clear to the Iraqi government ... our commitment is not open-ended."
 

Intel study: Iraq challenge 'daunting': If coalition forces were to leave in the next 18 months, the estimate said, "we judge that this almost certainly would lead to a significant increase in the scale and scope of sectarian conflict in Iraq."
 

Bush says he likes to keep people around with low expectations (No comment)
 

Bush no longer 'miserable failure'
 

Chavez sets May oil takeover date: Venezuela's president has said he will nationalise a series of oil projects in the Orinoco river belt within months.

The decision affects the oil firms Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Conoco Phillips, Statoil and BP.

The White House has said that it hopes that US firms will be treated "in accordance with international regulations".
 

Shocking Guantanamo images persist
 

'Men in grey suits' may tell Blair to go quietly
 

Bush: Let's talk some more about Iraq
 

Truck bomber kills 135 in deadliest Iraq blast: Police said 305 people were wounded. The casualties swamped the capital's hospitals. There were chaotic scenes at Ibn al- Nafis hospital in central Baghdad, where hallways overflowed with wounded on trolleys.
 

For an American soldier on patrol in Bagdad, driving a Humvee, speed is life. You don't want to stop. Ever. You'll probably tell me that we could just leave and then we wouldn't have to worry about those things ... but ... the guy driving that rig doesn't get to make those decisions. I'd drive fast too in Bagdad. Nothing personal.