THIS FAR AND NO FURTHER
A Timeline of Events Surrounding the Radical Right's Attempt to Subvert American Democracy
Written and Compiled by Black Max
January 2004
Week Three
Due to size considerations, this page has been divided into subpages.
Use the menu below to navigate the week's contents.
SubMenu
- January 15: In the book The Price of Loyalty, by journalist Ron Suskind, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill recalls being astonished at finding plans for covert CIA-sponsored assassinations around the globe designed to remove opponents of the US government. The plans had virtually no civilian checks and balances. O'Neill read of the planned assassinations in confidential documents provided to him in the days after the 9/11 attacks. O'Neill recalls, "What I was thinking is, 'I hope the President really reads this carefully.' It's kind of his job. You can't forfeit this much responsibility to unelected individuals. But I knew he wouldn't." The incident is only one of many documented in the book, which proves, as many have long suspected, that Bush is often disengaged from policy debates, lacks intellectual rigour, runs on gut instinct, and is heavily influenced by conservative ideological advisers. (Sydney Morning Herald)
Cheney confirms that the US is committed to "decades" of war
- January 15: In a blunt address to the Los Angeles World Affairs Council, Vice President Cheney says the administration is committed to decades of war if need be to eradicate any possible threats to the US. Cheney focuses on a "frightening characterization of the war on terrorism and the new kind of mobilization he said it demanded," according to the San Francisco Chronicle. Cheney tells the audience, "One of the legacies of this administration will be some of the most sweeping changes in our military, and our national security strategy as it relates to the military and force structure, and how we're based, and how we used it in the last 50 or 60 years, probably since World War II. I think the changes are that dramatic." He says he and Bush are planning to expand the military into even more overseas bases so the United States could wage war quickly around the globe. "scattered in more than 50 nations, the al-Qaeda network and other terrorist groups constitute an enemy unlike any other that we have ever faced," he says. "And as our intelligence shows, the terrorists continue plotting to kill on an ever-larger scale, including here in the United States." He says that Bush is establishing, as former president Harry Truman had, a new structure for a new long-term war and spreading the military into new areas of the globe. "On Sept. 11, 2001, our nation made a fundamental commitment that will take many years to see through," he says.
- That same day, in a speech in Arizona, Cheney once again asserts a non-existent relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda. "Saddam Hussein had a lengthy history of reckless and sudden aggression," Cheney says. "His regime cultivated ties to terror, including the al-Qaeda network, and had built, possessed, and used weapons of mass destruction." In reality, the only terrorists that Hussein has sponsored or associated himself with in any notable sense are homegrown Iraqi "terrorists" sent out against Iraqi dissidents. (San Francisco Chronicle, Bush on Iraq)
Bush makes 10-minutes visit to Martin Luther King's grave in between fundraisers
- January 15: President Bush makes a brief visit to the tomb of the Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. to mark what would have been the civil rights leader's 75th birthday, on his way to a $1.3 million campaign fundraiser in Atlanta. The New York Times describes it as a "hastily planned" visit squeezed in between two fundraisers, and the Daily Misleader notes, "Even though Bush may spend the majority of his time hobnobbing with donors at the fundraiser, because he will briefly visit Dr. King's grave, he is allowed to deem the entire trip 'official' and then bill taxpayers for portions of the huge cost of hotel rooms, rental cars, security, and travel. And those are no small costs -- the Washington Post notes that Air Force One alone costs $57,000 an hour to operate." Bush meets briefly with King's widow Coretta Scott King; the entire visit took no more than ten minutes.
- Hundreds of protesters beat drums and chant "Bush go home," and wave signs bearing slogans such as "War is not the answer" and "It's not a photo-op, George." Five Atlanta city buses. along with a number of squad cars, were parked in front of them to block their view of the president; police in riot gear stood atop the vehicles. The protesters were able to evade being herded into the usual "free speech zones" typically used to keep protesters out of sight of Bush. "No protester has ever been that close to Bush," says organizer Kelli Potts. "They tried to move us back -- but there were just too many of us," she says. "We pulled people together who where opposed to Bush's policies and who thought Bush's visit violated the spirit of Martin Luther King, who stood against hypocrisy." The group got within 100 yards of the president. Bush was not formally invited to attend commemorative events surrounding King's death, and critics accuse him of using the appearance to gain support from black voters. "What the Bush administration stands for is the exact opposite of what Dr. King does," says one protesters. "It's hypocritical for him to come on Dr. King's birthday." And the Reverend Raphael Allen says, "His administration has never supported anything to help the poor, education, or children. It's all about isolationism and greed for the upper class. That's not promoting the legacy of Dr. King." "Did he come to raise funds for Republicans and stop by to lay a wreath as a secondary ploy, or is he sincere about laying the wreath and the fund-raising secondary?" asks the Reverend R.L. White, president of the Atlanta chapter of the NAACP.
- Other civil rights leaders are outraged at the apparent exploitation of Dr. King's birthday as a tool to force taxpayers to bankroll a political fundraiser. Reverend Timothy McDonald, an organizer of Atlanta's Martin Luther King Day celebrations said, "It's the epitome of insult. He's really coming here for the fundraiser. The King wreath was an afterthought. ...I thought it was tacky, and I thought if the president was sincere as other presidents have been who visited the grave site, he would have stayed a few hours, not just a few minutes as he did." "It's hypocrisy for George Bush to come down here, raise money and do a drive-by at the grave site," says Democratic state Representative Tyrone Brooks, the president of the Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials. "It's not about Dr. King's legacy, it's about getting reelected." The president also attended a fund-raiser in New Orleans earlier in the day, where he promoted his faith-based initiatives to African-Americans. The total raised by Bush in the two fundraisers tops $2.3 million. Thousands of attendees of a day-long commemorative event at King's church, Ebenezer Baptist, were peremptorily told to clear out by 2 P.M. in preparation for Bush's arrival. The attendees protested, and were told by the Secret Service that if they stayed, they would be locked inside the church until after Bush had left the site. That idea galvanized the crowd, and their strenuous protests eventually forced the Secret Service to back down; many of the attendees then took to the street in protest of Bush's visit. Attempts to herd the protesters into a "free speech zone" sandwiched between two buildings over 500 feet back from the street failed; apparently police and Bush organizers didn't fancy the idea of herding King's supporters by force, a picture guaranteed not to play well in the media. Two protesters were arrested for stepping onto Atlanta Avenue and refusing to return to the sidewalk. (Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Daily Misleader, Miami Herald, Atlanta Independent Media Center, AP/Newsmax)
- January 15: Tens of thousands of Iraqis march through the streets of Basra demanding immediate elections in Iraq, responding to a call by Shi'ite cleric Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani for direct elections. US officials and most of Iraq's US-appointed Governing Council say the country cannot hold elections until 2005. They have been trying to persuade Sistani to soften his stance. Paul Bremer, Iraq's US governor, has said he respects Sistani, but that there is not enough time to hold elections before the handover of sovereignty. US officials say they are reviewing the plan to hold regional caucuses to try to make the process as open and transparent as possible. (Reuters)
Independent investigator of Plame outing has ties to Bush administration
- January 15: Patrick Fitzgerald, the newly appointed special counsel investigating the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson, is not as pristine or independent of a choice as the Justice Department would like America to think. Fitzgerald's appointment is illegal, as the law requires the special counsel to be selected from persons outside the Justice Department. Fitzgerald was a current Justice Department employee when selected. David Corn writes, "[deputy attorney general James] Comey could have chosen Fitzgerald to run the investigation without bestowing upon him the 'special counsel' title. But the point was to create the impression that the Administration had taken action to guarantee that this sensitive investigation would be free of political manipulation. Calling Fitzgerald a 'special counsel' is false advertising. Moreover, a presidential appointee [Fitzgerald] remains in charge, and another presidential appointee [Comey] is overseeing his work. ...'Jim Comey and Pat Fitzgerald are close friends,' says a former US Attorney. 'I highly respect them both. But I can't imagine Pat doing something Jim wouldn't want. This is different from having the investigation led by somebody not beholden to the department.'" (The Nation)
- January 15: Former vice president Al Gore slams the Bush administration and Bush himself on the administration's environmental policies, accusing Bush of being completely in the pocket of corporate interests and calling him a "moral coward." Gore says that "the Bush-Cheney administration is wholly owned by the coal, oil, utility and mining industries," and goes on to say, "While President Bush likes to project an image of strength and courage, the real truth is that in the presence of his large financial contributors, he is a moral coward." (Newsday)
- January 15: A coalition of public interest groups call for an immediate investigation into Attorney General John Ashcroft's 2000 Senate election campaign, focusing on illegal fundraising activities by his political action committees. Federal Election Commission documents show that Ashcroft accepted a mailing list, developed at a cost of $1.7 million, that deliberately violated the ceiling of $255,000 mandated for single contributions to a political campaign, and then illegally covered up the contribution. Ashcroft's Spirit of America PAC has already been fined $37,000 by the FEC for violations of federal campaign laws during the 2000 election, in which Ashcroft lost the election to the deceased Mel Carnahan. As of yet, no investigation has been scheduled. (NVRI)
- January 15: Former senator Carol Mosely Braun quits the Democratic presidential race. She is expected to throw her support to frontrunner Howard Dean. Braun, who has staunchly defended Dean against criticisms about his handling of racial issues during his tenure as governor of Vermont, never succeeded in raising the money necessary to make a major impression on voters. (ABC News)
- January 15: Scholar and author Chalmers Johnson examines the fact that America has extended its dominion over much of the world through its network of military bases. "This vast network of American bases on every continent except Antarctica actually constitutes a new form of empire -- an empire of bases with its own geography not likely to be taught in any high school geography class. Without grasping the dimensions of this globe-girdling Baseworld, one can't begin to understand the size and nature of our imperial aspirations or the degree to which a new kind of militarism is undermining our constitutional order." Currently the Pentagon owns or rents 702 bases in countries on every continent save Antarctica, and has another 6,000 bases in the US and its territories, according to the 2003 Base Status Report. This report is deliberately deceptive, for example failing to list the huge Camp Boundsteel in Kosovo, owned and operated for the US military by Halliburton subsidiary KBR. The report also omits bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Qatar, and Uzbekistan, although the military has established enormous base structures throughout the so-called "arc of instability" in the time since 9/11. Okinawa is another good example. Though the entire island is more or less a US military colony, with 10 Marine Corps bases, including the huge Air Station Futenma, the report only lists one base, Camp Butler. Similarly, the US maintains $5 billion worth of bases in Great Britain, passed off officially as Royal Air Force bases. An honest count would show over 1,000 bases throughout the world.
- Establishing this huge military "footprint" around the globe has been the responsibility of a quiet, under-reported member of the Bush administration, Andy Hoehn, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy. He and his colleagues have drawn up plans to implement Bush's preventive war strategy against "rogue states," "bad guys," and "evil-doers," as Johnson writes. "They have identified something they call the 'arc of instability,' which is said to run from the Andean region of South America (read: Colombia) through North Africa and then sweeps across the Middle East to the Philippines and Indonesia. This is, of course, more or less identical with what used to be called the Third World -- and perhaps no less crucially it covers the world's key oil reserves. Hoehn contends, 'When you overlay our footprint onto that, we don't look particularly well-positioned to deal with the problems we're now going to confront.'" As many as six bases are going up in Iraq, and new bases are planned for former Soviet satellite states in Eastern Europe, including Romania, Poland, and Bulgaria. In Asia, more bases are planned for Pakistan, which already houses four; India, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, the Philippines, and even Vietnam. In North Africa, new bases are planned for Morocco, Tunisia, and especially Algeria. In West Africa, bases are planned for Senegal, Ghana, Mali, and Sierra Leone, currently writhing under a 15-year civil war. "The models for all these new installations, according to Pentagon sources, are the string of bases we have built around the Persian Gulf in the last two decades in such anti-democratic autocracies as Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar, Oman, and the United Arab Emirates," Johnson writes. Many of these bases are what the Pentagon calls "lily pads," allowing US military forces to "jump" from one base to another to answer any call for deployment. The expense, of course, is staggering.
- Of course, such aggressive militarization of the world has had a backlash effect. It is considered one of the main reasons for the heightened number of terrorist attacks against US and US-allied countries. From 1993 through the 9/11 assaults of 2001, there were five major al-Qaeda attacks worldwide; in the two years since then there have been seventeen such bombings, including the Istanbul suicide assaults on the British consulate and an HSBC Bank. British military historian Correlli Barnett writes, "Rather than kicking down front doors and barging into ancient and complex societies with simple nostrums of 'freedom and democracy,' we need tactics of cunning and subtlety, based on a profound understanding of the people and cultures we are dealing with -- an understanding up till now entirely lacking in the top-level policy-makers in Washington, especially in the Pentagon." Johnson concludes, "[T]he 'war on terrorism' is at best only a small part of the reason for all our military strategizing. The real reason for constructing this new ring of American bases along the equator is to expand our empire and reinforce our military domination of the world." (TomDispatch/CommonDreams)
- January 16: London's eminent business journal Financial Times calls the Bush administration's plans to reconstruct Iraq's oil infrastructure "pipe dreams." Even senior Bush officials now believe that Iraq's oil industry will not begin to support the tremendous costs of the US occupation and reconstruction of that country's devastated infrastructure. "With all the information available, it seems that those in charge chose not to know," says James Placke, a senior associate at Cambridge Energy Research Associates who took part in "Iraq: The Day After," a report produced by the Council on Foreign Relations shortly before the war. "Like other aspects of Iraq, those making policy believed what they wanted to believe about oil, without reference to the facts," Placke says. Placke did not personally brief administration officials, but James Schlesinger, former secretary of defence and energy, was one who did. Schlesinger, who co-chaired the independent task force set up by the CFR, said "nobody" believed oil revenues would support reconstruction costs. There was, however, an expectation the industry could be revived more quickly than has proved the case. "There was a great deal of optimism about likely expenditures. I don't know if they didn't want to face up to realities, or come clean with their gloomier forecasts," he says, referring to the administration's own internal studies. He said his advice followed that of the CFR report: that after production costs, the oil industry would provide at most an annual $10 billion to $12 billion if captured intact with no further deterioration.
- An industry expert told the administration that big oil companies delivered a clear message that the US could not expect them to plough money into Iraq until the occupying forces had resolved the issues of sovereignty and ownership rights. Nonetheless, US officials acted as if companies would be hammering at the door, that it would be more of a question of keeping out the French and Russians, who had signed provisional oil deals with Saddam Hussein's regime. Analysts also pointed out that there had been no shortage of information on the state of the Iraqi oil industry. Regular updates came from the United Nations, which implemented the oil-for-food program. "Lamentable" was how Kofi Annan, UN secretary-general, described the Iraqi oil industry in December 1998, citing a study completed for the UN by Saybolt, a Dutch company. Nonetheless, in the build-up to hostilities, Americans were given a different picture. "Iraq, unlike Afghanistan, is a rather wealthy country," Ari Fleischer, then White House spokesman, said on February 18, 2003. "Iraq has tremendous resources that belong to the Iraqi people. ...Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction." Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defense secretary, was even more upbeat before a hearing of the House of Representatives appropriations committee on March 27. "There's a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't have to be US taxpayer money, and it starts with the assets of the Iraqi people," he said. "On a rough recollection, the oil revenues of that country could bring between $50 billion and $100 billion over the course of the next two or three years." The same day, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld told a Senate hearing: "When it comes to reconstruction, before we turn to the American taxpayer, we will turn first to the resources of the Iraqi government and the international community." Only a few in Congress dared question the administration's wishes for emergency war funding. One was Senator Robert Byrd, a veteran Democrat, who said he would not sign a "blank check." Placke describes the figures projected by Wolfowitz as "total fabrication...a colossal misrepresentation." Recalling a meeting he had with Vice President Cheney, Placke says, "What shocks me most was that these guys don't want to deal with reality. You have an aggressive administration wanting to do all these things, but doesn't plan for even the 5 per cent chance of all this going wrong. This really confirmed to me that this war was not about oil." (Financial Times)
- January 16: The Bush administration and the head of the Iraqi CPA, Paul Bremer, plans to make an "urgent appeal" to the United Nations to play a larger role in the planned transfer of power to Iraqi officials by June 30. This reversal of the administration's policy towards the UN is being joined by a reconsideration of the administration's policy towards allowing only countries that supported the US in the war against Iraq to now do business with that country. Nations such as France, Germany, and Russia, who opposed the war, may soon be allowed to bid on contracts with Iraq. "It's clear we want the United Nations to be involved," says an administration official. "It's clear the Iraqis want them. It's clear the security situation has improved, and we're willing to help with their security. But there are many stages we have to go through to get an agreement." As of yet, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan is said to be extremely reluctant to support the incredibly complex US plan for transferring power to the Iraqis -- a plan that has left officials on both sides bewildered. Annan wants the UN to play a bigger role in Iraq, but is unwilling to merely become a rubber stamp for US policy. Aides to Annan say they fear signing on to something that only looks democratic. "Are we supposed to have an advisory role or to have people in each of Iraq's 18 provinces?" asks one aide. "What would they do if they are out in the provinces? Who handles their security? Are we being asked to do something where we have no real authority? These are very difficult questions that need to be answered." However, an American CPA official says of the plan, "This is an Iraqi process. It's an Iraqi generated initiative. These guys in the Governing Council are trying to deal with their constituencies, including one very vocal constituent group that had 10,000 people in the streets of Basra this morning." The official fails to note that the plan was concocted, drafted, and given to the Iraqi Governing Council, itself a governing entity selected by the US, by State Department, Pentagon, and Bush administration officials. (New York Times/Independent Media)
- January 16: US Central Command in Iraq (CENTCOM) issues a blandly worded press release announcing that it is investigating allegations of prisoner mistreatment at Abu Ghraib prison. Defense Secretary Rumsfeld will claim that only when the release was issued did he learn of the allegations, a claim many find hard to believe. Soon afterwards, Rumsfeld will inform the president. (Seymour Hersh)
- January 16: The Bush administration's gaudy plans for a renewed space initiative to send men to Mars has lost much of its steam after investigators discover that the plans are intended to benefit corporate pals of the administration such as Halliburton, and much less designed to actually accomplish any sort of scientific objectives. He also fails to mention that right-wing think tanks such as the Project for the New American Century have long planned on using space for military purposes. Halliburton, formerly headed by Vice President Dick Cheney and a major financial backer of the Administration, has long supported funding a Mars plan because it is good for its drilling technology business. Coincidentally, Cheney is spearheading the Mars plan inside the White House. In 2001, Kiplinger's reported, "several companies and university labs will stand to benefit from new projects" in a Mars mission, particularly Halliburton. And the payoff could be big: Citizens Against Government Waste notes that, despite the White House's initial lowballing, legitimate "cost estimates for the new program range from $550 billion to $1 trillion." Four years ago, writing in the Oil & Gas Journal, Halliburton scientist Steve Streich pointed out why a Mars program would be so lucrative for Halliburton. He says a "Mars exploration program presents an unprecedented opportunity" for the industry and that it "warrants the support of both government and industry leaders." He says "one area of great importance is finding out of what the inside of Mars consists. That's where the petroleum industry comes in." Specifically, benefits for "the oil and gas industry may lie in technology that NASA will use for drilling into the surface of Mars." He says there is "great potential for a happy synergy between space researchers" on a Mars project and "the oil and gas industry."
- The same issue reported that Halliburton is already involved in a preliminary consortium of industry and academia "organized to support the development of new technology required for the Mars mission." Petroleum News confirmed that "NASA has been working with Halliburton and others to identify drilling technologies that might work on Mars." Bush is presenting the Mars mission as merely an opportunity to advance new space technologies. He says, "Along this journey we'll make many technological breakthroughs. We don't know yet what those breakthroughs will be, but we can be certain they'll come, and that our efforts will be repaid many times over." It now appears that both Halliburton and the Bush administration knows exactly what those advances will be used for: more oil drilling on Earth. Streich wrote, "Drilling technology for Mars research will be useful for the oil and gas industries." He continued by noting that a Mars mission "presents an unprecedented opportunity" to develop that drilling technique and "improve our abilities to support oil and gas demands on Earth." Cheney also pushed the program through by emphasizing the military benefits, including space-based defense systems. This motivation was echoed by GOP representative Tom Feeney, who recently told MSNBC's Joe Scarborough that: "somebody is going to dominate space. When they do, just like when the British dominated the naval part of our globe, established their empire, just like the United States has dominated the air superiority, ultimately, whoever is able to dominate space will be able to control the destiny of the entire Earth." (Daily Misleader, Center for American Progress/TomPaine.com)
- January 16: A newly uncovered document shows that Halliburton chose a high-priced Kuwaiti supplier for gasoline in Iraq in just one day after considering bids from only three companies. Halliburton is under heavy fire for overcharging the US over $61 million dollars for gasoline it arranged to have supplied to military units from a Kuwaiti supplier, Altanmia. (AP/Arizona Daily Star)
- January 16: Vinnell Corporation, a private security firm owned by defense contractor Northrop-Grumman, "has so badly botched the training of the new Iraqi Army that the Jordanian Army has been hastily brought in to finish the job," writes senior correspondant Steven Rosenfeld. As a result of Vinnell's incompetence, the creation and deployment of the Iraqi Army -- one of the most important institutions in a post-Hussein Iraq -- have been undermined. Military observers fear that the failure to rebuild a competent national army may create a scenario akin to Afghanistan, where the countryside is dominated by rival militias and the reach of the central government is marginal at best. "This whole thing is just nuts," says a retired Defense Intelligence Agency officer long based in the region. "All you had to do was take a Special Forces battalion based at Ft. Bragg and train the Iraqi Army. They do it one unit a time.... Instead, we have created a potential for civil war."
- Vinnell won the contract to rebuild the Iraqi Army months after the CPA forcibly disbanded the standing army; after it realized its error, the CPA turned to Vinnell instead of leaving the training to Army Green Berets as usual. In this case, Green Berets were not available; under Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, Green Berets and other special forces troops have been given new roles, more akin to military shock troops. Generals stationed in Iraq have said that special forces troops in the region were already stretched too thin to train the new Iraqi army. Rosenfeld observes, "What emerged was typical of the Iraq occupation: a planning vacuum. While Pentagon and CPA officials were scurrying for solutions, defense contractors sensed a bonanza and went to the military with proposals to solve the occupation's problems." A Northrup-Grumman executive, after hearing some well-connected scuttlebutt about the US military's needs, went to the Pentagon in November 2003 with a proposal and contract in hand. Vinnell won the contract primarily on the strength of its reputation of effectively training Saudi Arabia's National Guard for the last 25 years. Rosenfeld writes, "Vinnell's record sounded good in Washington -- here's a company with knowledge and a track record of working with Arabic-speaking soldiers.
- But defense and intelligence analysts who have worked in the Persian Gulf were quick to say otherwise. Vinnell's assignment in Iraq, they said, was different from its role in Saudi Arabia, where it interacted with high-level officers and helped with war games and big-picture operational planning. Vinnell started recruiting soldiers for the new Iraqi Army in August. In December, when its first battalion was slated to assist US forces with basic tasks, the Army admitted that 480 of the 900 men in the unit had deserted. Some desertions are to be expected. That is the case in Afghanistan, where the United States, British and French militaries are now training that country's new army. The reported reasons for the Iraqi desertions were low pay, inadequate training, faulty equipment and ethnic tensions. Retired special forces soldiers who have conducted this type of training grimaced when they read press accounts of the desertions, including interviews with soldiers. What was clear to them was Vinnell's approach was more akin to college instruction than military boot camp. Basic training discipline was lacking under Vinnell, according to accounts given by Iraqi trainees or deserters, who were not punished by US military officials."
- In December 2003, senior CPA officials realized that Vinnell needed to be replaced. One Washington Post reporter says, "They abandoned the Vinnell approach. They realized they needed to stand up a larger force more quickly. They said you can do some of it, but use the Jordanians to train the officers and others [private subcontractors] to do the NCOs [non-commissioned officers.] They just let Vinnell keep their contract." Vinnell was allowed to keep the entire $48 million even though the company was essentially fired less than halfway through the contract's duration. Peter Singer, an expert on private military contractors, says, "The model we are following is Afghanistan and I mean that in a negative way. We went in, toppled a regime, and left. We made a big to-do about creating an Afghan Army. Two years later, it's the weakest army on the ground." Singer believes the United States is "in the process of making compromises to declare victory." Despite a full troop rotation among American forces early in 2004, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld has said 30,000 troops will be returning in May. "That takes away one of the last remaining rationales to do the war, if we compromise on creating something better for the region -- if you build a weak, democratic state," he says. A retired senior CIA analyst goes even further, saying the hasty introduction of the Jordanians to train Iraqi soldiers was "proof-positive the Bush people want to get the hell out by next summer, no matter what." The Post reporter says of the Bush administration's contract procedures, "They did these contracts quickly. Grab the people you know. Throw money at them. My hunch is you will find they threw $50 million down the toilet, quickly getting it to Vinnell. Upon a month or two or reflection, they will try another approach." (TomPaine.com)
- January 16: Under the Hussein regime (and before), Iraqi women enjoyed some of the most modern legal protections in the Muslim world, under a civil code that prohibits marriage below the age of 18, arbitrary divorce and male favoritism in child custody and property inheritance disputes. Now the US-backed Iraqi Governing Council has voted to abolish all of those rights and protections in favor of enforcing strict Islamic legal doctrine, known as "sharia." Thousands of angry Iraqi women, from judges to Cabinet ministers to ordinary mothers and daughters, denounced the decision in street protests and at conferences, saying it would set back their legal status by centuries and could unleash emotional clashes among various Islamic strains that have differing rules for marriage, divorce and other family issues. "This will send us home and shut the door, just like what happened to women in Afghanistan," says Kurdish lawyer Amira Hassan Abdullah. Some Islamic laws, she noted, allow men to divorce their wives on the spot. "The old law wasn't perfect, but this one would make Iraq a jungle," she continues. "Iraqi women will accept it over their dead bodies." The order, narrowly approved by the 25-member council in a closed-door session Dec. 29, was reportedly sponsored by conservative Shiite members. The order is now being opposed by several liberal members as well as by senior women in the Iraqi government. The council's decisions must be approved by Paul Bremer, the chief US administrator in Iraq, and aides say unofficially that Bremer is unlikely to approve it. However, experts say that once US officials turn over political power to Iraqis at the end of June, conservative forces could press ahead with their agenda to make Sharia the supreme law.
- "It was the secret way this was done that is such a shock," says Nasreen Barawi, a woman who is Iraq's minister for social welfare and public service. "Iraq is a multiethnic society with many different religious schools. Such a sweeping decision should be made over time, with an opportunity for public dialogue." While there is no immediate threat of the decision becoming law, Barawi says, "but after June 30, who knows what can happen?" In interviews at several meetings and protests, women note that even during the politically repressive Hussein era, women had been allowed to assume a far more modern role than in many other Muslim countries and had been shielded from some of the more egregiously unfair interpretations of Islam advocated by conservative, male-run Muslim groups. Once Hussein was toppled, several women note, they hoped the new authorities would further liberalize family law. Instead, in the process of wiping old laws off the books, they said, Islamic conservatives on the Governing Council are trying to impose retrograde views of women on a chaotic postwar society. It is unclear who among the council members promoted the shift of family issues from civil to religious jurisprudence, the decision was made and formalized while Abdul Aziz Hakim, a Shiite Muslim who heads the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, was chairing the council under a rotating leadership system. (Washington Post/San Francisco Chronicle)
- January 16: Six conservative organizations have publicly broken ranks with the Bush administration and the GOP leadership, accusing Washington Republicans of spending tax monies "like drunken sailors" and accusing Bush of allowing those under him to do as they pleased without restraint. "The Republican Congress is spending at twice the rate as under Bill Clinton, and President Bush has yet to issue a single veto," says Paul Weyrich, national chairman of Coalitions for America. "I complained about profligate spending during the Clinton years but never thought I'd have to do so with a Republican in the White House and Republicans controlling the Congress." "The whole purpose of having a Republican president is to lead the Republican Congress," adds Paul Beckner, president of Citizens for a Sound Economy, whose co-chairman is former House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas. "The Constitution gives the president the power to veto legislation, and if Congress won't act in a fiscally responsible way, the president has to step in — but he hasn't done that. ...If the president doesn't take a stand on this, there's a real chance the Republicans' voter base will not be enthusiastic about turning out in November, no matter who the Democrats nominate," Beckner says. Weyrich warns that if the Senate passes the omnibus budget bill and Bush fails to veto it, "in all probability the party's conservative-activist core voters aren't going to work to help win the election for Bush and the Republicans, and they may well not even vote."
- The Heritage Foundation has projected that passage of the bill would "mark the third consecutive year of massive discretionary spending growth" following increases of 13 percent and 12 percent in the previous two years. "Congress' continued fiscal irresponsibility is clearly exhibited in the thousands of pork projects contained in the bill," the Heritage report notes. The Heritage report says the omnibus bill will set the stage for discretionary spending to increase by 9 percent in 2004 to $900 billion, not the 3 percent claimed by Congress. RNC spokeswoman Christine Iverson defends the budget, saying that while the last Clinton budget "proposed a 15 percent increase for spending unrelated to national defense, homeland security, entitlement programs and interest on the national debt," the first Bush budget "proposed lowering this increase to 6 percent, the second budget to below 5 percent and the latest to 2 percent for next year." Unfortunately, those numbers are false, and conservative critics are attacking Congress and Bush for spending far more than either admits. For more than a year, a rebellion in Republican ranks has been brewing over the spending issue. Conservatives, including some House Republicans, finally revolted openly over the $400 billion prescription-drug benefit passed by Congress and signed by Bush last year -- which would expand the government with the largest new entitlement in a generation. (Washington Times)
- January 16: Kevin Phillips, author of the book American Dynasty, traces the long, deep, and often hidden connections between the Bush dynasty and the Saudi oil oligarchs, including the bin Laden family. He notes that as early as 1964, George H.W. Bush was denounced by Democrat Ralph Yarborough "as a hireling of the sheik of Kuwait, for whom Bush's company drilled offshore oil wells." Phillips writes, "How these unusual relationships helped bring about 9/11 and then distorted the U.S. response to Islamic terrorism requires thinking of the Bush family as a dynasty. The two Bush presidencies are inextricably linked by that dynasty. " Phillips starts with "dynasty founder" George H. Walker, president of Harriman & Co., which helped rebuild the Baku oil fields just north of Iraq. Walker's son-in-law Prescott Bush was senior director of Dresser Industries, which became heavily involved with the Middle East after World War II. (Phillips gracefully skips over Bush's intimate involvement with funding and supporting the Nazi regime of Adolf Hitler.) Prescott Bush's son, George H.W. Bush, took the Bush family's involvement in the Middle East to a new level. Bush was the first CIA director, the first vice president, and the first president to have an oil background. Phillips notes, "This helps to explain his persistent bent toward the Middle East, covert operations and rogue banks such as the Abu Dhabi-based Bank of Credit and Commerce International, or BCCI, which came to be known by the nickname 'Bank of Crooks and Criminals International.'"
- All through his political career, "Bush encouraged CIA involvement in Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and other Middle Eastern countries, and he pursued policies that helped make the Middle East into the world's primary destination for arms shipments." On becoming CIA head in 1976, Bush forged strong ties with the intelligence networks of Saudi Arabia and Iran, then led by the shah. Saudi intelligence chief Kamal Adham, brother-in-law of King Faisal and a BCCI insider, was one of Bush's closest associates. Bush left the CIA in 1977 and became chairman of the executive committee of First International Bancshares, where he worked to cement financial relationships all over the Middle East. Bush, during his 12 years as vice-president and president, was deeply involved in two Middle East-centered scandals: the Iran-contra affair and "Iraqgate." Bush managed to cloak his involvement in Iran-contra pretty handily, but the involvement of BCCI in the illegal arms deals between Iran and the US indicates his involvement. "Iraqgate" landed squarely in Bush's lap. Bush oversaw the provision, by the US government, of the transfer of nuclear and biological weapons technology to Iraq for its war against Iran. ABC's Ted Koppel observed in June 1992, "It is becoming increasingly clear that George (H.W.) Bush, operating largely behind the scenes through the 1980s, initiated and supported much of the financing, intelligence and military help that built Saddam's Iraq into the aggressive power that the United States ultimately had to destroy."
- And the sons of George H.W. Bush were just as involved with Middle Eastern oil and financial interests, "lining up business deals with Saudi, Kuwaiti and Bahraini moneymen and cozying up to BCCI," as Phillips writes. "The Middle East was becoming a convenient family money spigot." George W. Bush first tapped into the Middle Eastern money pipeline through Texas businessman James Bath's Saudi contacts, billionaire Salem bin Laden and banker and BCCI insider Khalid bin Mahfouz. Bush's failed Arbusto Oil venture received $50,000 from Bath, probably provided by the bin Laden and bin Mahfouz connections. Bush's later oil venture, Harken Energy, was studied by the Wall Street Journal in 1991, which concluded, The mosaic of BCCI connections surrounding Harken Energy may prove nothing more than how ubiquitous the rogue bank's ties were. But the number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken -- all since George W. Bush came on board -- likewise raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son." Mahfouz and other BCCI players steered lucrative Middle Eastern contracts to Harken in return for access to the son of the US president. Meanwhile, Jeb Bush was cozying up to the Cuban and Latin American CIA connections in south Florida. but he, too, took advantage of the family name to forge some Middle Eastern ties. Phillips notes, "two of his business associates, Guillermo Hernandez-Cartaya and Camilo Padreda, both indicted for financial dealings, were longtime associates of Middle Eastern arms dealer, BCCI investor and Iran-Contra figure Adnan Khashoggi. ...Jeb Bush also socialized with Adbur Sakhia, the Miami BCCI branch chief and later its top U.S. official."
- Neil Bush has his own connections, lobbying for business contracts on behalf of Middle Eastern firms and forging a business relationship with Syrian-American businessman Jamal Daniel. One of their ventures, Ignite!, an educational software company, includes representatives of at least three ruling Persian Gulf families." And "forgotten son" Marvin Bush is involved. From 1993 to 2000 Marvin was a major shareholder, along with Mishal Youssef Saud al Sabah, a member of the Kuwaiti royal family, in the Kuwait-American Corp., which had holdings in several US defense, aviation and industrial security companies." George H.W. Bush was so involved in Saudi financial and political affairs that insiders in the Reagan White House called him "the Saudi vice-president'" a New Yorker article describes the Saudi ambassador to the US as "almost a member of the (Bush) family." Many feel that Bush's insistence on the 1991 invasion of Iraq to expel Iraq from Kuwait was not done for the benefit of the US, but was "an outgrowth of Bush's close ties to the oil industry and to Persian Gulf royal families, who felt threatened by Saddam's expansionism." In 1993, ex-president Bush joined the Carlyle Group, a venture firm that specialized in buying up defense companies and doubling or quadrupling their value. "The ex-president not only became an investor in Carlyle, but a member of the company's Asia Advisory Board and a rainmaker who drummed up investors," notes Phillips. "Twelve rich Saudi families, including the bin Ladens, were among them. In 2002, the Washington Post reported, 'Saudis close to Prince Sultan, the Saudi defense minister...were encouraged to put money into Carlyle as a favor to the elder Bush.' Bush retired from the company last October, and Baker, who lobbied US allies last month to forgive Iraq's debt, remains a Carlyle senior counselor."
- Unfortunately, while Bush was busy doing the bidding of his Middle Eastern business partners by invading Iraq, his actions galvanized Islamic true believers and radicals. "By the late 1990s, many of the Islamic insurgents who had been mobilized by the CIA and others to chase the Soviets out of Afghanistan were becoming increasingly anti-American. They found a kinship with Osama bin Laden, the renegade of his billionaire Saudi family, who was outraged at the U.S. presence in Saudi Arabia. When the United States launched a second war against Iraq in 2003 but failed to find weapons of mass destruction that Saddam was purported to have, international polls, especially those by the Washington-based Pew Center, charted a massive growth in anti-Bush and anti-American sentiment in Muslim parts of the world -- an obvious boon to terrorist recruitment. Even before the war, some cynics had argued that Iraq was targeted to divert attention from the administration's failure to catch Osama bin Laden and stop al-Qaida terrorism." Current US president George W. Bush is known to have tried to scuttle, or at least misdirect, the investigations into the 9/11 attacks in order to shift public attention away from his family's ties to the bin Ladens and to rogue elements in the Middle East. After the mid-2003 intelligence reports on 9/11 had 28 pages of its contents dealing with Saudi and other Middle Eastern governments redacted, Democratic senator Charles Schumer said, "There seems to be a systematic strategy of coddling and cover-up when it comes to the Saudis."
- Phillips concludes, "There is no evidence to suggest that the events of Sept. 11 could have been prevented or discovered ahead of time had someone other than a Bush been president. But there is certainly enough to suggest that the Bush dynasty's many decades of entanglement and money-hunting in the Middle East have created a major conflict of interest that deserves to be part of the 2004 political debate. No previous presidency has had anything remotely similar. Not one." (Houston Chronicle)
"The advent of a Machiavelli-inclined [Bush family] dynasty in what may be a Machiavellian Moment for the American Republic is not a happy coincidence.... National governance has, at least temporarily, moved away from the proven tradition of a leader chosen democratically, by a majority or plurality of the electorate, to the succession of a dynastic heir whose unfortunate inheritance is privileged, covert, and globally embroiling." -- Kevin Phillips, American Dynasty, quoted by Paul Krugman
- January 16: The Center for American Progress gives a detailed list of just how the Halliburton Corporation has profited through its intimate connections with the Bush administration. Here are the highlights.
- Awarding Halliburton No-Bid Contracts, Despite Company's Record: Halliburton received $2.26 billion in no-bid contracts from the Federal Government for reconstruction in Iraq. The total value of contracts in Iraq could eventually reach $15.6 billion. They were given these contracts despite having a history of price gouging. A 1997 GAO report found the company "billed the Army for questionable expenses for work in the Balkans, including charges of $85.98 per sheet of plywood that cost $14.06." And in 2002, the Pentagon's inspector general and a federal grand jury had investigated allegations that a Halliburton subsidiary "defrauded the government of millions of dollars by inflating prices for repairs and maintenance. The company was forced to pay $2 million in fines."
- Ignoring Halliburton War Profiteering, Then Stonewalling Investigation: After revelations surfaced that Halliburton overcharged the government by $61 million in Iraq, the White House stripped out a provision from the $87B Iraq spending bill that would have subjected the company and other price gougers to criminal penalties. When career government auditors demanded a probe of the controversy, the administration "obstructed the audit."
- Permitting Halliburton to Mistreat US Troops: The Bush administration has yet to penalize Halliburton or suspend its contracts, even after the Pentagon "repeatedly warned the company that the food it was serving the 110,000 U.S. troops in Iraq was 'dirty.'" The Pentagon specifically found "blood all over the floor" of kitchens, "dirty pans," "dirty grills," "dirty salad bars" and "rotting meats...and vegetables" in four of the military messes the company operates in Iraq. Halliburton's promises to improve "have not been followed through" -- and yet no action has been taken by the administration to reprimand the company.
- Cozying Up to Libya, After Urging by Halliburton: The administration has moved to normalize relations with Libya -- a move long pushed for by Halliburton. As CEO of Halliburton, Cheney lobbied to lift sanctions on Libya. In May of 1997, the Oil and Gas Journal reported, "Cheney said oil and gas companies must explore where the reserves are, and that means doing business in countries that may have policies that the US does not like." Cheney said, "The long-term horizon of the oil industry is at odds with the short term nature of politics." The next year, Cheney ratcheted up his campaign, once again criticizing the US security policy on foreign soil. The Malaysian News Agency reported, "Cheney hit out at his government for imposing economic sanctions like the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act." He told the state news agency on a visit there that US sanctions on Libya are "ineffective, did not provide the desire results and are a bad policy."
- Pushing Mars Exploration to Benefit Halliburton: Despite the White House's initial low-balling, legitimate "cost estimates for the new Mars program range from $550 billion to $1 trillion." And according to industry officials, "Halliburton would benefit considerably" from that huge new spending. The company has long pushed for the Mars program for that reason. In the April 24, 2000 edition of Oil & Gas Journal, a top Halliburton scientist said that a "Mars exploration program presents an unprecedented opportunity" for the industry to make billions. He noted the reason there was such "great potential for a happy synergy between [Halliburton] and space researchers" was because the new drilling techniques developed in a Mars program would aid Halliburton's drilling for oil on Earth.
- Revising Environmental Science for Halliburton: The Bush administration has also manipulated scientific facts to promote an oil and gas exploration technique pioneered by Halliburton called "hydraulic fracturing." The EPA said in a draft study from 2002 that the technique, which involves injecting benzene and other toxic chemicals into the ground, "could lead to benzene in underground sources of drinking water at levels above federal drinking water standards." After congressional staff expressed concerns, the EPA changed the data -- a revised study, produced one week later, found that benzene levels would not exceed the standards. The EPA gave no scientific reason for the change saying only that the revision was "based on feedback" from an industry source.
- Exempting Halliburton From Environmental Regulations: The administration's energy bill, a product of Cheney's secret 2001 task force, would "exempt the process called hydraulic fracturing from Safe Drinking Water Act regulations." The process "involves quickly pumping massive amounts of fluids -- sometimes including diesel fuel and other toxins -- into the ground." The technique is used "primarily by Halliburton."
- Providing New Tax Breaks for Halliburton: The House of Representatives approved an administration backed bill that would reduce the tax on domestic manufactures from 32 percent to 35 percent. The NY Times reports that the move would "benefit Halliburton." The tax break was estimated to "cost the Treasury about $61 billion over the next 10 years."
- Preserving Tax Loopholes For Halliburton: Bush promised, and then reneged on his promise, to close tax loopholes that allow companies like Halliburton to move offshore and avoid paying billions US taxes. He said "I think we ought to look at people who are trying to avoid US taxes as a problem. I think American companies ought to pay taxes here, and be good citizens." But according to the Center for Public Integrity, "Bush never pressed the issue, and his Administration's preferred line was that the convoluted American tax code -- rather than the questionable behavior of American corporations like Halliburton -- was the real culprit." Halliburton has benefited immensely from the administration's calculated negligence on the issue. While Cheney was CEO, Halliburton "dramatically increased its subsidiaries located in offshore tax havens, claiming at least twenty subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands alone."
- Preventing Workers From Suing Halliburton Over Asbestos Exposure: The Bush administration is pushing legislation in Congress that would protect Halliburton from lawsuits by workers poisoned by asbestos at its facilities. According to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, in the lead-up to the 2000 election, Halliburton and Dick Cheney personally "contributed more than $150,000 to members of Congress who sponsored legislation that would limit the ability of workers to sue companies for asbestos exposure." The LA Times reports "the first and biggest beneficiary of the plan may be companies such as Halliburton -- the Texas oil services firm -- which could save $3.5 billion of its pending liability for asbestos claims."
- January 16: Katherine Harris, the former Florida secretary of state who helped throw the 2000 election to her colleague George W. Bush, says she will not run for the position of US senator from Florida. While she won't run to replace retiring Democratic senator Bob Graham, she makes it clear that she does intend to run for Senate sometime in the future. Harris is currently serving as a US congresswoman from Florida. She may challenge Democratic senator Bill Nelson in 2006. (AP/Atlanta Journal-Constitution)
- January 16: In a truly strange little incident, Bush compliments Canadian Scott Reid, the senior strategist to Prime Minister Paul Martin, as being prettier than his press secretary Scott McClellan, during a state visit by both heads of state to Monterray, Mexico. "Well, you got a pretty face," he tells a clearly discomfited Reid. He continued, "You got a pretty face. You're a good-looking guy. Better looking than my Scott anyway." Reid makes a joke of the encounter: "I didn't know what to say. ...But I'll take what I can, I guess. When a Texas Republican says you've got a pretty face, then I guess there is just no way around it." (Toronto Globe and Mail)
