Archive for category Condolezza Rice

What’s the worst that can happen?

This is a question that must have been asked 12 years ago when the US invaded Iraq. Well the initial predictions were positive. The war will be quick, cheap, we will be hailed as liberators, there will be peace, so on and so forth. Of course none of that happened. They were dead wrong, but even me when I witnessed the reports of chaos in Iraq, I could not comprehend that this would happen. What is the worst that can happen? ISIS can happen. The relatively new Islamic terrorist group is different from other organizations because they are successful. They have the oil fields, they are surrounding Baghdad, they have both Iraqi and American weapons in their inventory and they are gaining more ground. This is made worse by their tendency to be very destructive. So far, over 1,700 Iraqi troops have been executed. So yes, that is the worst that can happen and the Bush administration is completely at fault no matter how indirectly this is. Maybe this is a question Obama should consider, especially with an upcoming midterm and a country filled with pissed off liberals.

1 Comment

The War Power, The Sergeant, the Senator: Treason or Heroism

The Sergeant who some years ago left his post in that unnecessary and unwinnable war in
Afghanistan is either a hero, a traitor, or just a terribly young man in the wrong war at the wrong time. He spent terrible years of torture and probably said things he didn’t really mean.

Some years ago in Vietnam, Senator McCain was shot down over Vietnam, another unconstitutional war, and equally unwinnable war, confessed repeatedly to things he later recanted, once safely in the United States, and is, quite rightly regarded, despite his confessions to American war crimes, a hero. The two cases are not quite completely on all fours, as we say in the law. But the similarity is sufficient to compare with each other and with the undergirding of law.

Presidents, from George Washington to Barack Obama, who are visited by war, either their own or, like Obama, inherited from another (in Obama’s case two other) fools who preceded them, have always had this power. While not yet president, and without this act may well not have become president, Ronald Reagan communicated with Iran, telling them, in effect, just to refuse to deal with Carter on releasing our citizens from the U. S. Embassy in Iran, and await his presidency. Their deal (which killed Jimmie Carter’s hope for a second term and by the way was treason, meriting a firing squad.)

The 30, 60, 90 day notification of Congress is also unconstitutional, but not for the reasons the Republicans and Democrats alike, trumpet. Saint Paul, as I recall, said “this trumpet has an uncertain sound.” And I know he said that some leaders have “zeal without knowledge.” This is Republican and Democratic leaders on steroids, just like my former wife.

The reason the War Powers Act is unconstitutional is not what is now said by either Republicans or Democrats, as I told Joe Biden when he was both Minority Senior member of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate and when he was chair. I testified before his committee a few times, and he called me at the law school sometimes to chat about this. The reason is simple. Due to both a few but very senior Democrats and almost all Republicans, Congress forced the Demo’s to give the president 30, 60, or 90 days to play with Congress’ army while he picked his nose. War has not been officially declared since FDR did it in WW2. George Bush (the first) and Colin Powell, in my opinion, got it right, constitutionally, by voting 50-50 in the Senate, and then the Dark Lord, Vice President Cheney, broke the tie and we went to war in Iraq the right way by law; and they had the smarts to stop when their limited mission was accomplished. And until this time, the President, as Commander in Chief, has no constitutional power to use the United States armed forces, save self-defense.

In the Framers’ mind that means only when the United States of America, not our allies, are attacked. For Utahns, the reason J. Reuben Clark, my hero and a great patriot, a rock-ribbed Republican who served under many Republican presidents, served variously as chief legal adviser to the Department of State (then, as an deputy Attorney General on loan from Justice to State,,,,,,now called Legal Adviser to the State Department; and Vice Secretary of State, and Ambassador to Mexico; and advised many presidents between world wars one and two, on all arms control treaties between those to dreadful wars) opposed NATO was because it delegated the war power to a generation not yet born and for the defense of people, and nations, not yet born. Neither the United Nations (Korean War) nor NATO (Ukraine?) can declare war for the United States of America. This is the statement of law, the War Clause, that makes this beyond debate. Remember, that it is also the sole right of Congress: not the President of the United States, nor NATO, nor the United Nations, that decides what constitutes International law, as well. So, both Constitutional Law and International Law, save an attack on the United States, inform us that Congress, not the president or these international bodies, who determines for war or peace.

So screw the people and the Congress and president now living. When the president, any president, has this army to use, that army will never return to Congress’ care. This is unconstitutional because it is an illegal attempt to delegate to the President a plenary power, given exclusively, textually, to the Congress. Like the power over interstate commerce (the road by which most civil rights legislation is constitutional), along with the equal protection and due process of law clauses of the 5th and 14th amendments. It’s as if Congress were to say to Obama, “Say, friend, we’re so damned tired of life in Washington, despite the cherry blossoms, we will do what the Supreme Court does, and reconvene when good weather returns. We’re going to go to Balboa Island, California, where it’s nice and sunny, in ocean or on the beach, and pick our nose and scratch our butts. And better yet, we have one in eight chances not to pick both with the same finger. Even though we’ve proven, time out of mind, that we in Congress cannot chew gum and pick our nose, simultaneously (a great blessing). So, pres., you now have the taxing and the spending power, and we’ll sweeten the loaf by throwing into the pot, since you do have to stick around in this shitty weather, and give you the power also to fund and provide for the Army, Air Force, Coast Guard, and Navy. And don’t sweat it about financing things by the provision in the Constitution that spending bills begin in the House. Since you already have the taxing and spending power, do all this in the White House. P.S. please instruct the Treasury Department to deliver our checks, our salaries, and all the REALLY big bucks from the armaments industry and all those other lobbyists. We really have earned this right by selling our souls to the devil. Have a good life.

I say that both Senator and Soldier are bona fide heroes. Ed Firmage xoxox

3 Comments

Ten Years Ago Today . . . And No It Was Not Worth It

I hate looking back.  Ten years ago today the US invastion of Iraq began. 

The push for war with Iraq felt like a time of public madness.  The American media has never been less absolutely incompetent than in those months.  Yeah, the media pretty much sucks now, but back then they were awful beyond the telling of it.  The largest peace rallies in history got no coverage.  American media has spent the last decade hoping no one reminds them how bad they were, how gullible, how insanely biased for the Bush administration they were and how they mindlessly lapped up any lie they were told. Read the rest of this entry »

47 Comments

Faux News: Iraq WMD Intel ‘Turned Out To Be Correct’

Via Media Matters. Faux News version:

BRIAN KILMEADE (co-host): [T]he last thing I would say, the other talking point from the administration put out through the media is, well what about Condoleezza Rice, who talked about weapons of mass destruction and still got to be Secretary of State, when there were no known weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? And the answer to that is simple — about 80 percent of the Western world and the Middle East from Egypt to Jordan thought he had weapons of mass destruction. All the evidence was there. He actually was caught with them. And there is evidence that Saddam Hussein was reconstituting his nuclear program. So everything turned out to be correct. You had the world, and an eight-month investigation, and a report that was out. That’s a lot different than what Ambassador Rice was either given or said.

Real-world information:

In 2004, the Special Advisor to the Director of Central Intelligence released a final report on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. The Iraq Survey Group, as it was known, found that Iraq “ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.”

As for the claim that Iraq still possessed chemical weapons, the report stated:

While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdad’s desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered.

The Iraq Survey Group report also judged that after 1995, Iraq “abandoned its existing [biological warfare] program in the belief that it constituted a potential embarrassment, whose discovery would undercut Baghdad’s ability to reach its overarching goal of obtaining relief from UN sanctions.” The report also stated that Iraq destroyed its undeclared stocks of biological warfare-related weapons in 1991 and 1992.

How many times and how thoroughly does a lie have to be debunked before the Faux News Channel stops repeating it?

I’m not even going to address Faux News Channel’s Benghazi conspiracy theory, because it doesn’t make the slightest bit of sense.

4 Comments

What We Still Don’t Know About The 9/11 Attacks

CNN breaking news

Ten years later, the facts are still coming out about the events of September 11, 2001. The first F-16s scrambled from Andrews Air Force Base were unarmed – the pilots knew the only way to stop a hijacked plane would be to crash into it. A little later, according to newly-released tapes, NORAD elected to ignore Vice President Cheney’s order to shoot down suspect aircraft.

The 9/11 Commission Report remains the best overall account of what happened during the attacks ten years ago. However, the vast majority of the 9/11 Commission’s investigative records remain sealed at the National Archives in Washington. About two-thirds of the material is still classified, years after the commission members wanted it released to the public. Included in the sealed archive is the complete transcript of the commission’s interview with President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney.

While some people refer to “the official story” of the 9/11 attacks, there actually isn’t one. The closest the Bush administration ever came to issuing an official account was former National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice’s testimony before the commission in April 2004. This was when Rice claimed, incredibly, that no-one “could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile.” Condi’s testimony basically amounted to a plea of incompetence on behalf of the U.S. government.

Robert Scheer points out that the 9/11 Commission was never able to definitively answer some of the the most important questions regarding the origin and motives of the 9/11 attackers. The truth might lead to a re-examination of U.S. foreign policy, and possibly embarrassment for some powerful people associated with bad decisions — both overt and covert.

The history of the 9/11 attacks is still being written. There is plenty we still don’t know. What we DO know: the last decade of war has caused lots of death and destruction, and the cost to U.S. taxpayers so far is $6.6 trillion in war funding plus another $580 billion for the Department of Homeland Security. We are left with a shameful legacy of war crimes, assassinations and torture, plus the loss of some of our constitutional rights, privacy, and freedom.

UPDATE:
Krugman is Right: We Should Be Ashamed of What Happened after 9/11

UPDATE: Jane Stillwater: Honoring 9-11: Time to audit the CIA’s incestuous relationship with Al Qaeda [Note: I think Jane is asking the right questions, but I don't agree with all her answers]

UPDATE: Kevin Gosztola: Ten Years After 9/11, Aviation Security Still Hysterical. It’s a world ruled by fear and terror, we just live in it and have nothing to say.

UPDATE: U.S. Attack Threat Remains Uncorroborated. Or, “Osama bin Laden is dead, but you can’t have your rights back yet because we have some more fear mongering to do.”

UPDATE: Chris Hedges:

We do not grasp that Osama bin Laden’s twisted vision of a world of indiscriminate violence and terror has triumphed.

…We could have gone another route. We could have built on the profound sympathy and empathy that swept through the world following the attacks. The revulsion over the crimes that took place 10 years ago, including in the Muslim world, where I was working in the weeks and months after 9/11, was nearly universal. The attacks, if we had turned them over to intelligence agencies and diplomats, might have opened possibilities not of war and death but ultimately reconciliation and communication, of redressing the wrongs that we commit in the Middle East and that are committed by Israel with our blessing. It was a moment we squandered. Our brutality and triumphalism, the byproducts of nationalism and our infantile pride, revived the jihadist movement. We became the radical Islamist movement’s most effective recruiting tool. We descended to its barbarity. We became terrorists too. The sad legacy of 9/11 is that the assholes, on each side, won.

UPDATE: Former Senator Bob Graham Urges Obama to Reopen Investigation into Saudi Role in 9/11 Attacks (Note: Bob Graham is also peddling a novel).

UPDATE: Russ Baker: Newly-revealed evidence links the Saudi royal family to Saudis in South Florida, who reportedly had contact with the 9/11 hijackers before fleeing the US prior to the attacks.

[T]he FBI, for reasons unknown, failed to provide the information to Congressional 9/11 investigators or to the …9/11 Commission, and thus it has remained a secret for the past decade.

…The 9/11 Commission report “found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials” financed Al Qaeda. But this carefully worded statement does not foreclose the possibility that members of the Saudi royal family personally provided financing, or that senior officials funded companies or outsiders that in turn provided financing.

UPDATE: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says that as an engineer he’s sure the twin towers were not brought down by jetliners.

230 Comments

Karl Rove: ‘Mushroom Cloud’ Meme Wasn’t Exaggeration

Mushroom cloud from TV series
Mushroom cloud on the horizon from TV series “Jericho.”

Via Media Matters. In his new book, President Bush’s Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove writes (emphasis added):

So, then, did Bush lie us into war? Absolutely not.

[...]

From my perch inside the West Wing — but outside the frantic activity in the Situation Room — I could see the care everyone was taking to not overstate the case or exaggerate the danger. The president emphasized this when we reviewed his speeches, and this care was reflected everywhere else in the administration.

(Pages 340-341 of Courage and Consequence)


October 7, 2002

Yeah, right. The fear mongering campaign was deliberate and orchestrated by the White House Iraq Group. Chief Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson proposed the “smoking gun/mushroom cloud” meme as the best way to scare people into backing a war of aggression.

“The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly [Saddam] can acquire nuclear weapons. But we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.”

Condoleezza Rice, September 8, 2002

The scary vision of mushroom clouds was repeated by President Bush and General Tommy Franks, head of Central Command. Vice President Dick Cheney declared Saddam to be a “mortal threat” on his way to “nuclear blackmail.”

The “all fear all the time” campaign worked wonders. From History Commons:

When 100,000 people march against the war in Washington, the largest antiwar demonstration since the Vietnam War, the Post buries the story in its Metro section. …Saddam Hussein is routinely, and effectively, conflated with 9/11, and the “smoking gun-mushroom cloud” trope is reported over and over again in TV news broadcasts. …By late September 2002, over half of Americans polled believe that Saddam was responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and 72 percent believe that Saddam will attack the U.S. with chemical or biological weapons.

And then, in October 2002, the Bush administration engineered a vote in Congress on the Iraq AUMF — just days before the first post-9/11 election.

More here: The Bush Administration’s Misleading and Inaccurate Public Statements on Iraq.

UPDATE: More from Rove’s book, via HuffPo:

“Would the Iraq War have occurred without W.M.D.? I doubt it…Congress was very unlikely to have supported the use-of-force resolution without the W.M.D. threat. The Bush administration itself would probably have sought other ways to constrain Saddam, bring about regime change, and deal with Iraq’s horrendous human rights violations.”

3 Comments

Bush’s Final Gift to The New Administration: Yet Another War

Navy intercept boat

U.S. Navy special forces and Marines on an 11-meter rigid-hull inflatable boat, conducting maritime interception operations in the northern Arabian Gulf. (U.S. Navy photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Aaron Peterson)

The Jerusalem Post reports that the U.S. Navy intercepted an Iranian-owned merchant vessel last week in the Red Sea. This operation was one of a number of interceptions and searches being carried out on the basis of the memorandum of understanding signed between Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and then-US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on January 16, aimed at halting arms smuggling into Gaza. The Bush administration committed to helping Israel enforce a blockade of the Gaza Strip.

Glenn Greenwald comments:

What possible justification is there for using American resources — the American military — to patrol the Red Sea in order to ensure that Gazans remain defenseless? That question is particularly pronounced given that the U.S. is already shoveling, and will continue to shovel, billions and billions of dollars to Israel in military and other aid. Why, on top of all of that, are increasingly scarce American resources, rather than Israeli resources, being used to bar Palestinians from obtaining weapons?

So here we are, directly involved in an armed conflict between Israel and the Palestinians, with no declaration of war or even a congressional authorization for the use of military force. Not to mention we’re increasing tensions between the U.S. and Iran at the very moment when the Iranians are helping to keep the lid on Shiite insurgent activity in Iraq. Thank you, former President Bush. And wake up, President Obama– you’ve been punked.

UPDATE:
President Obama, in an interview yesterday with al Arabiya television, said: “Americans are not your enemy… But ultimately, people are going to judge me not by my words but by my actions and my administration’s actions.” So, what about the U.S. Navy blockading Gaza?

UPDATE:
Amnesty International investigates the undisciplined behavior of Israeli troops who invaded the Gaza Strip. These are our allies in the new war Bush bequeathed to President Obama.

Chris Cobb-Smith, a military expert and part of Amnesty International’s team, was an officer in the British Army for almost 20 years. He said he was staggered by what he saw and by the behaviour and apparent lack of discipline of the Israeli soldiers. “Gazans have had their houses looted, vandalized and desecrated. As well, the Israeli soldiers have left behind not only mounds of litter and excrement but ammunition and other military equipment. It’s not the behaviour one would expect from a professional army,” he said.

In most cases, the families had fled or were expelled by the soldiers. In some cases, however, the soldiers prevented the families from leaving, using them as “human shields”.

UPDATE: Admiral Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, confirmed the Red Sea interception but said the ship was searched with permission. “We were not authorized to seize the weapons or do anything like that.”

6 Comments

Bush lied, thousands died

On the last day of the Bush presidency, let’s review the greatest shame of his regime.

It’s almost 11 minutes in length, but extremely important. We must never forget. Will these criminals ever face justice?

Readers, please add your own links and videos in the comments. There are just too many to even narrow them down to the most succinct.

, , ,

30 Comments

Condi Rice Takes Responsibility For Failing To Stop 9/11 Attacks

Via Raw Story:

Outgoing Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has acknowledged that she was responsible for the security failures that made possible the 9/11 attacks. However, she did so only fleetingly and in a backhanded manner before returning to justifications of her actions.

Condi's exit interview on CNN

In a CNN “exit interview” with CNN’s Zain Verjee broadcast today, Rice conceded her failure as Bush’s National Security Advisor in 2001.

“The worst breach of national security in the history of the United States came under your watch,” Verjee persisted.

“Absolutely,” Rice agreed.

“Did you ever consider resigning?” asked Verjee. “Taking responsibility?”

“I do take responsibility,” Rice finally acknowledged, “but this was a systemic failure. … We, the administrations before us, had not thought of this as the kind of war against the terrorists that we were going to have to wage.”

Rice complained that nobody told her exactly “when, where, how” before the 9/11 attacks. In testimony before the 9/11 Commission, she said, “the use of airplanes as weapons actually was never briefed to us.”

Worst. National Security Advisor. Ever.

UPDATE: The House Government Oversight Committee has uncovered new information about Condi Rice’s involvement in the pre-invasion lying about Iraq’s WMD capabailities.

7 Comments

Did Anybody Anticipate Bush Would Be The Worst President Ever?

Did we anticipate this?

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice, May 16, 2002

I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon; that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile.

President George W. Bush, September 1, 2005

I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees. They did appreciate a serious storm but these levees got breached and as a result much of New Orleans is flooded and now we’re having to deal with it…

Vice President Dick Cheney, June 19, 2006

I guess if I look back on it now, I don’t think anybody anticipated the level of violence that we have encountered [in Iraq].

Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, September 1, 2007

Bernanke also admitted that the effects of the mortgage meltdown and subsequent credit crunch were more widespread than he had anticipated.

“In particular, the further tightening of credit conditions, if sustained, would increase the risk that the current weakness in housing could be deeper or more prolonged than previously expected, with possible adverse effects on consumer spending and the economy more generally,” Bernanke said.

Of course, any intelligent person could have foreseen all of these catastrophes, and many, many people did. Bush ignored the warnings. For example, financial experts have been telling us for years that our whole economy was being propped up by a housing bubble. Bush administration bungling has led to yet another trillion-dollar fiasco.

The U.S. economy faces its worst crisis since the 1930s, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Expectations for a quick end to the crisis are fading fast. “I think it’s going to last a lot longer than perhaps we would have anticipated,” Anne Mulcahy, chief executive of Xerox Corp., said Wednesday.

UPDATE: From Think Progress– Bush Compares The Financial Crisis He Created To The Terrorist Attacks He Never Saw Coming. “The current financial crisis is a direct result of Bushonomics and should not be dismissed as just another unanticipated tragedy.”

UPDATE: Remember “The Ownership Society”? In 2004, Bush was so proud of the sub-prime mortgage housing bubble that he campaigned on it as the middle class went into debt up to their eyeballs.

UPDATE: Did The Onion get it right in 2001 or what? Bush: ‘Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over.’

UPDATE: I really thought the Bush administration was doing their best to make sure the credit collapse wouldn’t happen until after they left office. Well, that didn’t work. So they are doing what they always do, telling us that their “solution” to the fiasco they led the country into is the only option and must be implemented immediately, and without any debate. This is not the first time they’ve pulled this, as Glenn Greenwald notes. Why do the Democrats go along with it?

3 Comments

Lying Bitch!

I’m re-posting thisfor regular folks (non-liars) to see what lying looks like. Keep in mind, this is just one KIND of lying.



From an email sent by Wexler’s office:

Today, in hearings on Capitol Hill, I confronted Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on her role in the lies, exaggerations, and misdirection that led us into the Iraq war.

During my questioning, Secretary Rice falsely stated that she never saw intelligence casting doubt on the Bush Administration claims that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction. This unbelievable statement is flatly contradicted by numerous government reports and CIA testimonials.

No one should be immune from accountability and the rule of law.

7 Comments

Will McCain Call It Defeat?

Condi Rice has agreed to a troop withdrawal timetable to end the occupation of Iraq.

McCain - defeatThe cowardly defeatocrats and cut ‘n’ runners have kicked ass. Declaring that the deal means “the left won the Iraq debate,” Spencer Ackerman notes that the withdrawal plan is nearly identical to the plan offered by the Center for American Progress.

The withdrawal timetable that they labeled “a surrender date” a little over a year ago is now Bush administration policy. Let’s say it again with feeling: WITHDRAWAL TIMETABLE.

Oh. My. God.

What will John McCain say? Via Think Progress:

– “If you pass a resolution…that dictates withdrawal and a time for withdrawal, all you’re doing is telling the enemy, ‘hang on, we’re leaving.’” [March 2007]

– “If you set a date for withdrawal, then the consequences of failure are catastrophic.” [8/20/07] (YouTube link)

– “An artificial timetable based on political expediency would have led to disaster and could still turn success into defeat.” [7/19/08]

– “They’ll come home with honor. And it won’t be just at a set timetable.” [7/22/08]

McCain repeatedly has rebuked Obama on Iraq. Campaigning Wednesday in New Mexico, he said Obama “has made it clear he values withdrawal from Iraq above victory in Iraq.”

Yesterday, Senator Obama said, “They are working on a plan that looks, lo and behold, like the plan that I’ve been advocating. I will encourage the administration to move forward with it.”

Matt Yglesias identifies the big winner from this deal:

[T]his is undoubtedly a triumph for Nouri al-Maliki. He’s managed to continue securing the short-term security benefits of an American military presence, but now without bearing the costs of being a supporter of an unpopular long-term presence. And beyond that, Maliki’s now succeeded through politics at doing what al-Sadr and various Sunni resistance groups couldn’t achieve through force of arms — he’s made the Americans promise to go!

And that’s not all. To sweeten the deal, Maliki gets almost $11 billion in U.S. weapon systems, including 140 Abrams tanks, hundreds of other armored vehicles and 24 attack helicopters. That might be enough to send the Peshmerga packing and get control of Kirkuk.

7 Comments

%d bloggers like this: