THINGS LOOKING MIGHTY GRIM FOR THE BUSHIES

I posted a piece last night stating that the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg were looking into Cheney's possible involvement with Treasongate. Below is the beginning of WSJ's research into the issue. Things are looking real bad for the Bushies on all levels. Fitzgerald is now looking into conspiracy. And, I saw a piece sent from Ken which reports that Bush is losing it and throwing one tantrum after another.

I have no sympathy whatsoever. This administration of corrupted hooligans deserves all that they get. Let Fitzgerald throw the book at the entire pathetic lot of them.

The Republicans blatantly stole two elections and got away with it thanks to the greedy, the truly evil and the spineless. All we are left with now, after almost 6 years, is life in a hellhole of hurt and misery for years to come. The Great Depression Numero 2? Get ready. Of course, Cheney and Frist continue to get richer while folks in the Midwest (including my 80 year old mother) will have to scramble to pay $1600. per month for heat this winter. That alone should turn the entire region to a real deep hue of blue. LS

"FOCUS OF CIA LEAK PROBE APPEAR TO WIDEN"
Found via Raw Story

WSJ ON CIA LEAK PROBE"

IMPEACH DUMYA?

POLL INDICATES AMERICANS FAVOR IMEACHMENT IF LIED ABOUT IRAQ

We know for a fact that he did, don't we?

AMERICANS FAVOR IMPEACHMENT IF BUSH LIED ABOUT IRAQ

THE LIE IS BREAKING US. WE ARE NOW SPENDING $6 BILLION A MONTH ON IRAQ

IRAQ IS BREAKING OUR FINANCIAL BACKS

ALAS, CHENEY IS GETTING RICHER, HOWEVER
His options worth $241,498 a year ago are now valued over a cool $8 mil. Maybe Dickie should chip a nickle or two to pay for the mess he help create in Iraq.

"CHENEY'S HALLIBURTON STOCK OPTIONS ROSE 3,281% LAST YEAR

FRIST IS GETTING RICHER TOO

FRIST ACCUMULATED STOCKS OUTSIDE OF TRUST

BIG TROUBLE IN BUSHDISE

White House officials are duking it out among themselves, it seems. Card doesn't like Rove anymore. Rove allegedly blamed Libby and Cheney for Treasongate. It's been suggested that Dick and George don't like each other anymore, either. What is, I wonder, all of the fuss about? Why would the most disciplined Nazi like group in Washington start a brawl amongst their own? Iraq? Treasongate? Katrina? Or is about saving one's derriere when the house of cards begins its collapse?

By the way, where is Dick? Raw Story and other liberal online presses are wondering.

http://jabbs.blogspot.com/2005/10/fineman-people-are-out-for-karl-rove.html

SOME IN WHITE HOUSE DON'T LIKE ROVE ANYMORE

More on Rove/Treasongate: New Props, New Mysteries

http://www.davidcorn.com/archives/2005/10/rove_scandal_ne.php

NEW MYSTERIES NEW PROPS

BREAKING AND DEVELOPING PIECE ON DICKIE BOY

Ken sent this humdinger to me on email tonight:

From Huffington

The Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are working on stories that point to Vice President Dick Cheney as the target of special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald's investigation into the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame's name.

hmmm....maybe that is why dickie boy is hiding and dickie and george aren't buddies anymore.

Another gem from Ken

LIBBY DID NOT TELL GRAND JURY ABOUT KEY CONVERSATION

http://nationaljournal.com/scripts/printpage.cgi?/about/njweekly/stories/2005/1011nj1.htm

LIBBY WITHHOLDS CRUCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE GRAND JURY

SITE LINKS ABRAMOFF TO MAFIA HIT THUGS AND 9/11 HIJACKERS

Seem far fetched? Maybe. Maybe not. Under the Bush Administration with its over abundance of greedy hacks, cronies and lobbyists, anything in the realm of corruption, sleaze and mayhem is possible. Treat yourself to a peek at another great find from Ken.

http://www.madcowprod.com/

ABRAMOFF, MAFIA HIT THUGS AND HIJACKERS

Snippets of News on the Unraveling of the Party of Corruption

GOP CORRUPTION IN OHIO:

NOE TRANSFERRED COIN CASH BEFORE GIVING TO REPUBLICAN PARTY.
Found on the Toledo Blade via Raw Story.com
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051009/NEWS24/51009002

PILFERED OHIO FUNDS WENT TO REPUBLCANS

NEWSPAPER SUPPRESSES COINGATE STORY UNTIL AFTER THE 2004 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2005/10/06/ohio/index_np.html

CORRUPT NEWSPAPER REPORTER PROTECTS CORRUPT BUSH

ON CORRUPTION IN THE WHITE HOUSE

ROVE'S MISSING EMAIL
(You have to scroll down to see the story)

ROVE'S MISSING EMAIL

FITZGERALD'S MOUSE TRAP
Great piece from the Huffington Post

FITZGERALD'S MOUSE TRAP

UNRAVELING? REPUBLICAN CRACKS BEGIN TO SHOW

http://www.sundayherald.com/52180

REPUBLICAN CRACKS

CORRUPTION IN GOP TEXAS

John Dean weighs in on Tom Delay case.

This is a great and well researched piece.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20051007.html

JOHN DEAN ON TOM DELAY

FISSURE WITHIN GOP CONSERVATIVE BASE

Bush is called the Manchurian Candidate in a conservative on line publication "The Business On Line.

Excerpt:

But we know a lost cause when we see one: the longer President Bush occupies the White House the more it becomes clear that his big-government domestic policies, his preference for Republican and business cronies over talented administrators, his lack of a clear intellectual compass and his superficial and often wrong-headed grasp of international affairs – all have done more to destroy the legacy of Ronald Reagan, a President who halted then reversed America’s post-Vietnam decline, than any left-liberal Democrat or European America-hater could ever have dreamed of. As one astute American conservative commentator has already observed, President Bush has morphed into the Manchurian Candidate, behaving as if placed among Americans by their enemies to do them damage.

FISSURE WITHIN GOP CONSERVATIVE BASE

BUSH'S STUNNING FAILURE IN IRAQ

In from Ken this morning - an awesome piece written by Joe Klein of Time. I wonder how the deluded neocons can continue to put up with Bush's idiocy. Bush should be impeached immediately and the rest of his appointed incompetent "war" hacks should be fired and jailed today. Bush's massive screwups in Iraq alone offer more than enough hard evidence for impeachment. This is a must read. LS

It details just what a perfect storm of arrogance, stupidity, careerism and self-delusion was needed to make the Iraq invasion such a stunning failure. If I were to bold the important stuff the entire story would be in bold

It took an administration stupid enough to undertake the invasion to stupidly botch every single opportunity for some small measure of success along the way. Idiots.

This is one for your archive. -K

Excerpt:

More than a dozen current and former intelligence officers knowledgeable about Iraq spoke with TIME in recent weeks to share details about the conflict. They voiced their growing frustration with a war that they feel was not properly anticipated by the Bush Administration, a war fought with insufficient resources, a war that almost all of them now believe is not winnable militarily. "We're good at fighting armies, but we don't know how to do this," says a recently retired four-star general with Middle East experience. "We don't have enough intelligence analysts working on this problem. The Defense Intelligence Agency [DIA] puts most of its emphasis and its assets on Iran, North Korea and China. The Iraqi insurgency is simply not top priority, and that's a damn shame."


Saddam's Revenge
The secret history of U.S. mistakes, misjudgments and intelligence failures that let the Iraqi dictator and his allies launch an insurgency now ripping Iraq apart
By JOE KLEIN

Sep. 26, 2005
Five men met in an automobile in a Baghdad park a few weeks after the fall of Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime in April 2003, according to U.S. intelligence sources. One of the five was Saddam. The other four were among his closest advisers. The agenda: how to fight back against the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq. A representative of Saddam's former No. 2, Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri, was there. But the most intriguing man in the car may have been a retired general named Muhammad Yunis al-Ahmed, who had been a senior member of the Military Bureau, a secret Baath Party spy service. The bureau's job had been to keep an eye on the Iraqi military--and to organize Baathist resistance in the event of a coup. Now a U.S. coup had taken place, and Saddam turned to al-Ahmed and the others and told them to start "rebuilding your networks."

The 45-minute meeting was pieced together months later by U.S. military intelligence. It represents a rare moment of clarity in the dust storm of violence that swirls through central Iraq. The insurgency has grown well beyond its initial Baathist core to include religious extremist and Iraqi nationalist organizations, and plain old civilians who are angry at the American occupation. But Saddam's message of "rebuilding your networks" remains the central organizing principle.

More than two years into the war, U.S. intelligence sources concede that they still don't know enough about the nearly impenetrable web of what Iraqis call ahl al-thiqa (trust networks), which are at the heart of the insurgency. It's an inchoate movement without a single inspirational leader like Vietnam's Ho Chi Minh--a movement whose primary goal is perhaps even more improbable than the U.S. dream of creating an Iraqi democracy: restoring Sunni control in a country where Sunnis represent just 20% of the population. Intelligence experts can't credibly estimate the rebels' numbers but say most are Iraqis. Foreigners account for perhaps 2% of the suspected guerrillas who have been captured or killed, although they represent the vast majority of suicide bombers. ("They are ordnance," a U.S. intelligence official says.) The level of violence has been growing steadily. There have been roughly 80 attacks a day in recent weeks. Suicide bombs killed more than 200 people, mostly in Baghdad, during four days of carnage last week, among the deadliest since Saddam's fall.

More than a dozen current and former intelligence officers knowledgeable about Iraq spoke with TIME in recent weeks to share details about the conflict. They voiced their growing frustration with a war that they feel was not properly anticipated by the Bush Administration, a war fought with insufficient resources, a war that almost all of them now believe is not winnable militarily. "We're good at fighting armies, but we don't know how to do this," says a recently retired four-star general with Middle East experience. "We don't have enough intelligence analysts working on this problem. The Defense Intelligence Agency [DIA] puts most of its emphasis and its assets on Iran, North Korea and China. The Iraqi insurgency is simply not top priority, and that's a damn shame."

The intelligence officers stressed these points:

 They believe that Saddam's inner circle--especially those from the Military Bureau--initially organized the insurgency's support structure and that networks led by former Saddam associates like al-Ahmed and al-Duri still provide money and logistical help.

 The Bush Administration's fixation on finding weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in 2003 diverted precious intelligence resources that could have helped thwart the fledgling insurgency.

 From the beginning of the insurgency, U.S. military officers have tried to contact and negotiate with rebel leaders, including, as a senior Iraq expert puts it, "some of the people with blood on their hands."

 The frequent replacement of U.S. military and administrative teams in Baghdad has made it difficult to develop a counterinsurgency strategy.

The accumulation of blunders has led a Pentagon guerrilla-warfare expert to conclude, "We are repeating every mistake we made in Vietnam."

THE WRONG FOCUS

It is no secret that General Tommy Franks didn't want to hang around Iraq very long. As Franks led the U.S. assault on Baghdad in April 2003, his goal--and that of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld--was to get to the capital as quickly as possible with a minimal number of troops. Franks succeeded brilliantly at that task. But military-intelligence officers contend that he did not seem interested in what would come next. "He never once asked us for a briefing about what happened once we got to Baghdad," says a former Army intelligence officer attached to the invasion force. "He said, 'It's not my job.' We figured all he wanted to do was get in, get out and write his book." (Franks, through a spokesman, declined to comment for this article.)

The rush to Baghdad, critics say, laid the groundwork for trouble to come. In one prewar briefing, for example, Lieut. General David McKiernan--who commanded the land component of the coalition forces--asked Franks what should be done if his troops found Iraqi arms caches on the way to Baghdad. "Just put a lock on 'em and go, Dave," Franks replied, according to a former U.S. Central Command (Centcom) officer. Of course, you couldn't simply put a lock on ammunition dumps that stretched for several square miles--dumps that would soon be stripped and provide a steady source of weaponry for the insurgency.

U.S. troops entered Baghdad on April 5. There was euphoria in the Pentagon. The looting in the streets of Baghdad and the continuing attacks on coalition troops were considered temporary phenomena that would soon subside. On May 1, President George W. Bush announced, "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended," on the deck of an aircraft carrier, near a banner that read MISSION ACCOMPLISHED. Shortly thereafter, Franks moved his headquarters from Qatar back to Florida. He was followed there in June by McKiernan, whose Baghdad operation included several hundred intelligence officers who had been keeping track of the situation on the ground. "Allowing McKiernan to leave was the worst decision of the war," says one of his superiors. (The decision, he says, was Franks'.) "We replaced an operational force with a tactical force, which meant generals were replaced by colonels." Major General Ricardo Sanchez, a relatively junior commander and a recent arrival in Iraq, was put in charge. "After McKiernan left, we had fewer than 30 intelligence officers trying to figure who the enemy was," says a top-ranking military official who was in Iraq at the time. "We were starting from scratch, with practically no resources."

On May 23, the U.S. made what is generally regarded as a colossal mistake. L. Paul Bremer--the newly arrived administrator of the U.S. government presence, the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA)--disbanded the Iraqi army and civil service on Rumsfeld's orders. "We made hundreds of thousands of people very angry at us," says a Western diplomat attached to the CPA, "and they happened to be the people in the country best acquainted with the use of arms." Thousands moved directly into the insurgency--not just soldiers but also civil servants who took with them useful knowledge of Iraq's electrical grid and water and sewage systems. Bremer says he doesn't regret that decision, according to his spokesman Dan Senor. "The Kurds and Shi'ites didn't want Saddam's army in business," says Senor, "and the army had gone home. We had bombed their barracks. How were we supposed to bring them back and separate out the bad guys? We didn't even have enough troops to stop the looting in Baghdad."

A third decision in the spring of 2003--to make the search for WMD the highest intelligence priority--also hampered the U.S. ability to fight the insurgents. In June, former weapons inspector David Kay arrived in Baghdad to lead the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), which had 1,200 intelligence officers and support staff members assigned to search for WMD. They had exclusive access to literally tons of documents collected from Saddam's office, intelligence services and ministries after the regime fell. Kay clashed repeatedly with U.S. military leaders who wanted access not only to the documents but also to some of the resources--analysts, translators, field agents--at his disposal. "I was in meetings where [General John] Abizaid was pounding on the table trying to get some help," says a senior military officer. "But Kay wouldn't budge."

Indeed, a covert-intelligence officer working for the ISG told TIME correspondent Brian Bennett that he had been ordered in August 2003 to "terminate" contact with Iraqi sources not working on WMD. As a result, the officer says, he stopped meeting with a dozen Iraqis who were providing information--maps, photographs and addresses of former Baathist militants, safe houses and stockpiles of explosives--about the insurgency in the Mosul area. "The President's priority--and my mission--was to focus on WMD," Kay told TIME. "Abizaid needed help with the counterinsurgency. He said, 'You have the only organization in this country that's working.' But military guys are not used to people telling them no, and so, yes, there was friction."

Sanchez learned that autumn that there were 38 boxes of documents specifically related to the city of Fallujah, a hotbed of Sunni rebellion. Months later, when military-intelligence officers finally were able to review some of the documents, many of which had been marked NO INTELLIGENCE VALUE, the officers found information that they now say could have helped the U.S. stop the insurgency's spread. Among the papers were detailed civil-defense plans for cities like Fallujah, Samarra and Ramadi and rosters of leaders and local Baathist militia who would later prove to be the backbone of the insurgency in those cities.

U.S. military-intelligence sources say many of the documents still have not been translated or thoroughly analyzed. "You should see the warehouse in Qatar where we have this stuff," said a high-ranking former U.S. intelligence official. "We'll never be able to get through it all. Who knows?" he added, with a laugh. "We may even find the VX [nerve gas] in one of those boxes."

MISJUDGING THE ENEMY

As early as June 2003, the CIA told Bush in a briefing that he faced a "classic insurgency" in Iraq. But the White House didn't fully trust the CIA, and on June 30, Rumsfeld told reporters, "I guess the reason I don't use the term guerrilla war is that it isn't ... anything like a guerrilla war or an organized resistance." The opposition, he claimed, was composed of "looters, criminals, remnants of the Baathist regime" and a few foreign fighters. Indeed, Rumsfeld could claim progress in finding and capturing most of the 55 top members of Saddam's regime--the famous Iraqi deck of cards. (To date, 44 of the 55 have been captured or killed.) Two weeks after Rumsfeld's comment, the Secretary of Defense was publicly contradicted by Centcom commander Abizaid, who said the U.S. indeed faced "a classical guerrilla-type campaign" in Iraq.

In a sense, both Rumsfeld and Abizaid were right. The backbone of the insurgency was thousands of Baathist remnants organizing a guerrilla war against the Americans. According to documents later seized by the U.S. military, Saddam--who had been changing locations frequently until his capture in December 2003--tried to stay in charge of the rebellion. He fired off frequent letters filled with instructions for his subordinates. Some were pathetic. In one, he explained guerrilla tradecraft to his inner circle--how to keep in touch with one another, how to establish new contacts, how to remain clandestine. Of course, the people doing the actual fighting needed no such advice, and decisions about whom to attack when and where were made by the cells. Saddam's minions, including al-Duri and al-Ahmed, were away from the front lines, providing money, arms and logistical support for the cells.

But Saddam did make one strategic decision that helped alter the course of the insurgency. In early autumn he sent a letter to associates ordering them to change the target focus from coalition forces to Iraqi "collaborators"--that is, to attack Iraqi police stations. The insurgency had already announced its seriousness and lethal intent with a summer bombing campaign. On Aug. 7, a bomb went off outside the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad, killing 19 people. Far more ominous was the Aug. 19 blast that destroyed the U.N.'s headquarters in Baghdad, killing U.N. representative Sergio Vieira de Mello and 22 others. Although al-Qaeda leader Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi claimed responsibility for the attack, U.S. intelligence officials believe that remnants of Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) carried it out. "It was a pure Baathist operation," says a senior U.S. intelligence official. "The Iraqis who served as U.N. security guards simply didn't show up for work that day. It wasn't a suicide bomb. The truck driver left the scene. Our [explosives] team found that the bomb had the distinctive forensics of Saddam's IIS."

On Oct. 27, 2003, the assaults on "collaborators" that Saddam had requested began with attacks on four Iraqi police stations--and on International Red Cross headquarters--in Baghdad, killing 40 people. The assaults revealed a deadly new alliance between the Baathists and the jihadi insurgents. U.S. intelligence agents later concluded, after interviewing one of the suicide bombers, a Sudanese who failed in his attempt, that the operation had been a collaboration between former Baathists and al-Zarqawi. The Baathists had helped move the suicide bombers into the country, according to the U.S. sources, and then provided shelter, support (including automobiles) and coordination for the attacks.

MISHANDLING THE TRIBES

By almost every account, Sanchez and Bremer did not get along. The conflict was predictable--the soldiers tended to be realists fighting a nasty war; the civilians, idealists trying to create a new Iraq--but it was troubling nonetheless. The soldiers wanted to try diplomacy and began reaching out to the less extreme elements of the insurgency to bring them into negotiations over Iraq's political future. The diplomats took a harder line, refusing to negotiate with the enemy.

Military-intelligence officers presented the CPA with a plan to make a deal with 19 subtribes of the enormous Dulaimi clan, located in al-Anbar province, the heart of the Sunni triangle. The tribes "had agreed to disarm and keep us informed of traffic going through their territories," says a former Army intelligence officer. "All it would have required from the CPA was formal recognition that the tribes existed--and $3 million." The money would go toward establishing tribal security forces. "It was a foot in the door, but we couldn't get the CPA to move." Bremer's spokesman Senor says a significant effort was made to reach out to the tribes. But several military officials dispute that. "The standard answer we got from Bremer's people was that tribes are a vestige of the past, that they have no place in the new democratic Iraq," says the former intelligence officer. "Eventually they paid some lip service and set up a tribal office, but it was grudging."

The Baathists, on the other hand, were more active in courting the tribes. Starting in November 2003, tribal sheiks and Baathist expatriates held a series of monthly meetings at the Cham Palace hotel in Damascus. They were public events, supposedly meetings to express solidarity with the Iraqi opposition to the U.S. occupation. (The January 2004 gathering was attended by Syrian President Bashar Assad.) Behind the scenes, however, the meetings provided a convenient cover for leaders of the insurgency, including Muhammad Yunis al-Ahmed, the former Military Bureau director, to meet, plan and distribute money. A senior military officer told TIME that U.S. intelligence had an informant--a mid-level Baathist official who belonged to the Dulaimi tribe--attending the meetings and keeping the Americans informed about the insurgents' growing cohesion. But the increased flow of information did not produce a coherent strategy for fighting the growing rebellion.

THE DEALMAKING GOES NOWHERE

Saddam was captured on Dec. 13, 2003, in a spider hole on a farm near Tikrit. His briefcase was filled with documents identifying many of the former Baathists running support networks for the insurgency. It was the first major victory of what the U.S. called the postcombat phase of the war: in early 2004, 188 insurgents were captured, many of whom had been mentioned in the seized documents. Although Izzat Ibrahim al-Duri, Saddam's former No. 2, narrowly evaded capture, much of his Mosul and Kirkuk apparatus was rolled up. Baathist financial networks were disrupted in several provinces. The CIA, in fact, believes that Saddam's capture permanently crippled the Baathist wing of the insurgency. "A guy like al-Duri is more symbol than substance at this point," a U.S. intelligence official says. "The parade has passed him by."

Military-intelligence officers who were in Iraq at the time, however, saw evidence that the Baathists regrouped in the spring of 2004, when the U.S. was preoccupied with battling a rebellion led by Shi'ite extremist Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq's south and with the fight for the rebel-held city of Fallujah in the Sunni triangle. And the U.S. intelligence officials believe that some former regime loyalists began to be absorbed by other rebel groups, including those made up of religious extremists and Iraqi nationalists.

Al-Ahmed, say U.S. intelligence officials, is still running the support network he began building after the meeting with Saddam in the car. In May 2004 al-Ahmed set off on one of his periodic tours of the combat zone, meeting with local insurgent leaders, distributing money and passing along news--a trip later pieced together by U.S. intelligence analysts wading through the mountain of data and intelligence provided by low-level local informants. Al-Ahmed started in his hometown of Mosul, where he had been supervising--from a distance--the rebuilding of the local insurgent network disrupted after Saddam's capture. He moved on to Hawija, where he met a man thought to be a senior financier of the insurgency in north-central Iraq. After a brief stay at a farmhouse near Samarra, he met with military leaders of religious and nationalist rebel groups in Baghdad and with Rashid Taan Kazim, one of the few faces from the deck of cards (al-Duri is another) still at large, who is thought to be running a support network for the insurgency in the north and west of Iraq. Al-Ahmed's final stop was Ramadi, where he distributed $500,000 to local insurgency leaders.

What is remarkable is the extent to which the U.S. is aware of al-Ahmed's activities. "We know where Muhammad Yunis al-Ahmed lives in Damascus," says a U.S. intelligence official. "We know his phone number. He believes he has the protection of the Syrian government, and that certainly seems to be the case." But he hasn't been aggressively pursued by the U.S. either--in part because there has been a persistent and forlorn hope that al-Ahmed might be willing to help negotiate an end to the Baathist part of the insurgency. A senior U.S. intelligence officer says that al-Ahmed was called at least twice by former Prime Minister Iyad Allawi--an old acquaintance--and that a representative of an "other government agency," a military euphemism that usually means the CIA, "knocked on his door in 2004 and asked if he was willing to talk. He wasn't."

STARTING OVER AGAIN

In the middle of 2004, the U.S. again changed its team in Baghdad. Bremer and Sanchez left, replaced by Ambassador John Negroponte and General George Casey. At the same time, there was a new transitional Iraqi government, led by Iyad Allawi. Negroponte set up a joint military-diplomatic team to review the situation in the country. The consensus was that things were a mess, that little had been accomplished on either the civilian or the military side and that there was no effective plan for dealing with the insurgency. The new team quickly concluded that the insurgency could not be defeated militarily--but that it might be divided. The attempts to engage potential allies like al-Ahmed became the unstated policy as U.S. and Iraqi officials sought ways to isolate foreign terrorists like al-Zarqawi.

But progress in the effort to defuse the insurgency through dealmaking has been slow--and in some cases has led the U.S. to ease pressure on individuals tied to rebel groups. Consider the careful handling of Harith al-Dhari, chairman of the Association of Muslim Scholars and one of Iraq's most important Sunni leaders. In late 2003, several insurgent groups began to meet regularly in the Umm al-Qura mosque in Baghdad, over which al-Dhari presides. According to U.S. intelligence reports, al-Dhari--who has said he might encourage his organization to take part in the democratic process--did not attend the meetings. But his son Muthanna--who is thought to be an important link between the nationalist and religious strains of the insurgency--did. In August 2004, the son was arrested after his car scanned positive for explosives residue. But he was quickly released, a retired DIA analyst says, under pressure from Iraq's government, to keep channels open to his father. "It would be difficult to lure Harith into the tent if Muthanna were in jail," says the former officer.

By April 2004, U.S. military-intelligence officers were also holding face-to-face talks with Abdullah al-Janabi, a rebel leader from Fallujah. The meetings ended after al-Zarqawi--who had taken up residence in Fallujah--threatened to kill al-Janabi if the talks continued, according to U.S. and Iraqi sources. But attempts to negotiate with other insurgents are continuing, including with Saddam's former religious adviser. So far, the effort has been futile. "We keep hoping they'll come up with a Gerry Adams," says a U.S. intelligence official, referring to the leader of the Irish Republican Army's political wing. "But it just hasn't happened."

CIVIL WAR?

The leadership in Baghdad changed yet again this year. Negroponte left Baghdad in March to become director of national intelligence. He was replaced by Zalmay Khalilzad. But the turnover in the Iraqi government was far more important: religious Shi'ites, led by Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari, took charge, a severe irritant to many Sunnis. "The insurgents see al-Jaafari as a traitor, a man who spent the Iran-Iraq war in Iran," says a senior military officer. "And many of the best officers we have trained in the new Iraqi army--Sunnis and secular Shi'ites who served in Saddam's army--feel the same way." Al-Jaafari did not help matters by opening diplomatic ties with Iran, apologizing for Iraq's behavior in the Iran-Iraq war and cutting economic deals with the Iranians.

In fact, some Iraq experts in the U.S. intelligence community have come to the conclusion that Iraqis' courageous recent steps toward democracy--the elections in January and the writing of a constitution that empowers the religious Shi'ites and the Kurds (though it is resoundingly opposed by the Sunnis)--have left the country in a more precarious position. "The big conversation in our shop these days," says a military-intelligence officer, "is whether it would be a good thing if the new constitution is voted down [in the public referendum] next month."

Iraq experts in the intelligence community believe that the proposed constitution, which creates autonomous regions for the Kurds and Shi'ites in the oil-rich north and south, could heighten the chances of an outright civil war. "A lot of us who have followed this thing have come to the conclusion that the Sunnis are the wolves--the real warriors--and the religious Shi'ites are the sheep," says an intelligence officer. "The Sunnis have the power to maintain this violence indefinitely."

Another hot debate in the intelligence community is whether to make a major change in the counterinsurgency strategy--to stop the aggressive sweeps through insurgent-riddled areas, like the recent offensive in Tall 'Afar, and try to concentrate troops and resources with the aim of improving security and living conditions in population centers like Baghdad. "We've taken Samarra four times, and we've lost it four times," says an intelligence officer. "We need a new strategy."

But the Pentagon leadership is unlikely to support a strategy that concedes broad swaths of territory to the enemy. In fact, none of the intelligence officers who spoke with TIME or their ranking superiors could provide a plausible road map toward stability in Iraq. It is quite possible that the occupation of Iraq was an unwise proposition from the start, as many U.S. allies in the region warned before the invasion. Yet, despite their gloom, every one of the officers favors continuing--indeed, augmenting--the war effort. If the U.S. leaves, they say, the chaos in central Iraq could threaten the stability of the entire Middle East. And al-Qaeda operatives like al-Zarqawi could have a relatively safe base of operations in the Sunni triangle. "We have never taken this operation seriously enough," says a retired senior military official with experience in Iraq. "We have never provided enough troops. We have never provided enough equipment, or the right kind of equipment. We have never worked the intelligence part of the war in a serious, sustained fashion. We have failed the Iraqi people, and we have failed our troops." --With reporting by Brian Bennett/ Washington and Michael Ware/Baghdad

FISSURE IN GOP

Is the Guilty of Perjury Party headed toward a train wreck? They should be. LS

Found on Raw Story: CRACKS BEGIN TO EMERGE IN REPUBLICAN PARTY
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Cracks_begin_to_emerge_in_mantle_1005.html

"http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Cracks_begin_to_emerge_in_mantle_1005.html">FISSURE IN GOP

Fissure between the Bush Administration and the Military?

U.S. General Questions Iraq War. Said he doesn't think he has the moral authority to send his soldiers into combat in Iraq.

U.S. GENERAL QUESTIONS WAR IN IRAQ

DELAY AND BLUNT SWAPPED DONATIONS

http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20051005-022643-9419r

DELAY AND BLUNT SWAPPED DONATIONS

BUSH TOLD PALESTINIAN LEADERS THAT GOD TOLD HIM TO END TYRANNY IN IRAQ

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Bush_allegedly_told_Palestinian_leaders_God_1006.html

BUSH SAID GOD TOLD HIM TO END TYRANNY IN IRAQ

GOP EXTREME IS CRASHING?

I certainly hope so. It is well past time.

The MSM is doing a lukewarm job of reporting news critical of the bush administration’s appalling incompetence in dealing with disasters and the war in Iraq.

Lukewarm news is better than none at all, I suppose. At least the MSM is suggesting that something is terribly wrong of late.

I am trying to be optimistic, OK? It is a stretch, I know.

These are rather dire and depressing times, as many of us have come to realize after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. You witnessed first hand the screw-ups and ineptitude of our government in its non-response.

Bring on 2006 and the liberation of our Democracy! Free us from the Bush marriage of corporate lobbyists and government. The end result is, to be perfectly vulgar, is that we, the people, are so royally screwed by such a union.

NUMERO TWO FOR THE BUG MAN

Dear Me! DeLay is indicted for yet another crime. Shocking? Hell no. We in Texas know better.

DeLay Indicted Numero 2

UH OH! ANOTHER HACK NOMINATED FOR A JOB

Harriett Miers tied to DeLay, TRMPAC, Texas Lottery Scandal and Cleansing Bush's Guard Records

Found via Buzz Flash.com

ANOTHER HACK NOMINATED BY BUSH FOR SUPREME COURT

KEEP ON WRITING THOSE HOT CHECKS, W.

Some media are finally getting something we so called "reckless liberals" have known for some time.

From the Seattle Times: "Our Cash: It is a National Security Issue"

FINALLY GETTING IT

MORE ON GROVER N. AND JACK A.

I am not talking about Sesame Street characters here. It's more like The Godfather types.

DeLay BUDDIES GROVER AND JACK

A GOP CULTURE OF CORRUPTION

Howard Dean had a point when he said the Republican Party under Bush is mired in a culture of corruption. Here are a few pieces, sent to me today by Ken, that confirm this grim fact. LS

From the George Stephanopoulos show today on the Valerie Plame leak:

Source to Stephanopoulos: President Bush Directly Involved In Leak Scandal
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/02/bush-directly-involved/

Piece Here

Near the end of a round table discussion on ABC This Week, George Stephanopoulos dropped this bomb:

Definitely a political problem but I wonder, George Will, do you think it ís a manageable one for the White House especially if we do not know whether Fitzgerald is going to write a report or have indictments but if he is able to show as a source close to this told me this week, that President Bush and Vice President Cheney were actually involved in some of these discussions.

This would explain why Bush spent more than an hour answering questions from special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald. It would also fundamentally change the dynamics of the scandal. President Bush could no longer claim he was merely a bystander who wants to ìget to the bottom of it.î As Stephanopoulos notes, if Bush played a direct role it could make this scandal completely unmanageable.

Click here

AND....................

This was posted on Think Progress before the Stephanopolous revelation. -K

Senior Administration Officials Could Be Charged With Criminal Conspiracy
http://thinkprogress.org/2005/10/02/criminal-conspiracy/

The public defense of both Karl Rove and Scooter Libby in the CIA leak scandal have focused on the specific claim they did not know Valerie Plame's name. Even if that ís true, it does not mean anyone is off the hook.

If Patrick Fitzgerald is unable to prove a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, Rove, Libby and others could still be charged with perjury if they lied to investigators. Today's Washington Post floats another possibility:

But a new theory about Fitzgerald's aim has emerged in recent weeks from two lawyers who have had extensive conversations with the prosecutor while representing witnesses in the case. They surmise that Fitzgerald is considering whether he can bring charges of a criminal conspiracy perpetrated by a group of senior Bush administration officials. Under this legal tactic, Fitzgerald would attempt to establish that at least two or more officials agreed to take affirmative steps to discredit and retaliate against Wilson and leak sensitive government information about his wife. To prove a criminal conspiracy, the actions need not have been criminal, but conspirators must have had a criminal purpose.

The White House Iraq Group could be in trouble

UH OH! Real trouble in GOP paradise, or hell, it seems of late. Well deserved hell, in my view, because the Bush hacks and loyalists sold out the American people to lobbyist and corporate interests. We lost while our leaders gained so much in terms of their own personal financial well-being. Folks, they sold their souls and our's to boot to the devil. LS

From Time Magazine: POWER OUTAGE.

Sunday, Oct. 02, 2005
Power Outage
House leader Tom DeLay's indictment upends the Republicans' to-do list and their outlook for next year's elections. Can they recover in time?
By KAREN TUMULTY AND MIKE ALLEN
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/printout/0,8816,1112775,00.html

Click here

MORE GOP MORTIFICATION: SEGREGATION REVISITED

TEXAS U.S. SENATORS PROPOSE BILL TO SEGREGATE LOUISIANA'S STUDENTS FROM TEXANS.

We know for a fact, based upon the proactive, creative and energetic approach to assisting the victims of Katrina, that Houston is a city comprised of compassionate and generous people. Houstonians did more than murmur a few words of sympathy or offer to say a few extra prayers for the sufferers. Much of Texas did the same thing. They opened their hearts, check books and gave the gift of time to actively and positively do something useful and meaningful for the evacuees.

The key to the success in addressing the needs of over 200,000 sufferers lies in the sustained force of action. Positive and effective action requires that goals are stated and achieved by planning, commitments of the necessary amount of funds, resources along with the crucial ingredients of honesty, uncompromised leadership and an ethical backbone of those charged with the task at hand. Partisan politics are normally set aside when extraordinary disasters impact so many people. The overall goal is and should be focused on helping the victims of the disaster.

In times such as catastrophe, whether natural or man made, most if not all local, state and federal politicians will make speeches that promise to do everything within their means to help those impacted by the disaster. Some politicians honestly care and make good on their promises. Unfortunately, there are not too many, but there are a few. Some do not care at all, if there is nothing for them to gain politically or personally. Other politicians are extremely clever with words and are manipulative. This type will put on a big show and make a lot of noise about caring and action but do the bare minimum to squeak by with a little face time on TV, or do nothing at all.

Then there are the politicians who are more devious and calloused in that they give a tightly scripted appearance of caring for the victims by saying all of the right things, and perform the necessary acts, like show up at a shelter to hand out much needed goods for awhile. The unfortunate fact of the matter is, this type of politician does not care at all. Rather, they are obeying an entity other than their constituents. The passive aggressive model of a politician is the most dangerous to the victims of disaster, as well as to the constituents whom they supposedly represent.

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison falls in this last category of politicians. She will say what people want to hear, as long as it is falls within her extremely conservative Republican Party ideology, of course. She will claim to be a compassionate conservative. The Senator will smile a lot and/or look deeply concerned, whichever is required. Afterwards, the Senator, as if acting on orders from powers to be, not her constituents, will return to Washington to pull the plug on measures taken to guarantee a modicum of dignity and well being for those struck by the disaster.

Who is the Senator beholden to? Who is pulling the strings?

Specifically, over 40,000 students from Louisiana have been enrolled in schools in Texas, almost all of them from New Orleans. Like other states, Texas has integrated the evacuees into their existing student populations.

Federal law prohibits local school districts from educating homeless children separately from the general population. Districts are also not allowed to label homeless children by identifying them with special identification cards or wristbands. One can well imagine the demoralizing and demeaning impact on children who, though no fault of their own, are unintended victims of a natural disaster.

Kay Bailey Hutchison, along with another Republican, John Cornyn is now actively attempting to waive these federal rules. They want to stigmatize the Katrina’s victim’s children by separating them from the rest of the students. Senators Hutchison and Cornyn maintain that separate schools should be opened for them, or, if not possible, the uprooted children would have to wear wristbands or carry ID cards.

Kay Bailey Hutchison’s spokesman insists that the goal of the reversal of the federal mandate is to “keep the children of Louisiana safe.” The “safety” issue arises from a fistfight that took place in one of Houston’s high schools when a local student threw a can of Sprite at the new students.

This incident is the exception, not the rule. Two children from New Orleans got into a fight started by a Houston student, and now an excuse has been fabricated to punish all of the children, including our own from Texas.

Why would Texan children be punished? Because they would be denied the opportunity to participate in the humanitarian act of sharing their lives and classrooms with Katrina’s victims.

The Republicans in Texas and in the U.S. Congresses are obviously bottom line driven, especially when it comes to their personal financial opportunities. One has to wonder, although a tad cynically, what these Republican officials have to gain, in their pocket books, by segregating and consequently punishing displaced children.

The world has viewed the United States federal government’s pathetic and humiliating performance in the aftermath of both Katrina and Rita. It is likely, too,that our Bush run government’s incompetence was not lost on global terrorists. But that is another issue.

Many if not most Texans expressed a strong desire to do something active and constructive to offset the government’s ineptitude by looking after Katrina’s victims’ children.

When Barbara Bush announced to the world that the arrival of Katrina’s victims in our state was “scary” and because they were underprivileged, living in the Astrodome wasn’t such a bad thing, the message was sent to the obedient Bush loyalists to do whatever it took to get rid of these “scary” people. Her son, the President, could not do this, for he is obviously now, as economist and journalist Paul Krugman puts it, damaged goods. It was up to Mother Bush to step up and send the sheep scrambling.

But why? What is in it for the Bush loyalists? Money? Surely the Bush’s and their loyalists have more than enough to go around.

Most likely Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn cringe at sharing the State’s property taxes that fund the public schools for even more minorities. The federal government has promised to reimburse the state for the cost of housing and educating Katrina’s victims but everyone knows that FEMA is stretched financially if not completely broke at this point. Despite their words and promises, it is probably a given that the Bush Administration and their blind loyalists Senators Hutchison and Cornyn, will not reimburse hosting states for the costs of housing, food and education because the funds have been squandered to loyalist contractors or redirected to Iraq. Chances are states won’t receive a dime in reimbursement from the federal government under the Bush Administration.

Maybe the cost of education of the segregated children could be passed on to the state of Louisiana at some point.

What about demographics? What would concern Senators Hutchison and Cornyn in this regard?

Would the influx of so many “minorities” compromise the early redistricting of our State, i.e. there will be more Democrats in the state now if the evacuees decide to stay in Texas? Separate the children so they and their parents will want to return to a normal school in New Orleans?

No Child Left Behind?

If separated, would the students from Louisiana get waivers from the requirements of the bill? Do Republicans fear that the evacuees would bring down the state’s already disappointing and low test scores? If separated, the students from Louisiana would not be required to perform at the same levels as Texans students? Would they be exempt from standardized testing, thus ensuring a lower quality education?

Funding? As it is, the rich and mostly fat white boys and girls in Austin don’t want to pay for the schooling of Texan minorities, much less those from another state. They would rather build prisons because prisons hire people and can produce a profit if outsourced. A loyalist contractor would be charged with building and managing the prison. And of course, there are the killing chambers within the prisons.

One should smell a rat. Barbara Bush sent her orders to the Senators Hutchison and Cornyn and they fully intend to obey her.

Are these the people we want to represent us?

I should think not.

Libby Shaw

BUSH'S ROGUE GALLERY

Great piece found on Buzz Flash.com. The author lists the corrupt cronies of Bush, as far as we know them today. We know that there are many, many more Bush rogues. LS


The Bush Administration: A Culture of Cronyism and Corruption

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT

Cronyism in the Bush Administration is Systemic: a Look at the Rogue’s Gallery

FEMA
Michael Brown – still working for FEMA. Monday night, CBS reported that Michael Brown remains on the FEMA payroll. Brown replaced another Bush crony, former Bush campaign manager Joe Allbaugh, on the job. And, “CNN’s Ed Henry has learned that Michael Brown, the former FEMA chief who stepped down after being relieved of his post leading the disaster effort, continues to receive pay from FEMA so that, according to a FEMA spokesman, "he can help assess what went wrong" in a consulting role.” (CNN, Morning Grind, 9/27/05). At least this time he brings some first-hand experience to the job.

OMB
David Safavian – arrested for lying and obstructing a criminal investigation. Safavian “didn't have much hands-on experience in government contracting when the Bush Administration tapped him in 2003 to be its chief procurement officer. A law-school internship helping the Pentagon buy helicopters was about the extent of it. Yet as administrator of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy, Safavian, 38, was placed in charge of the $300 billion the government spends each year on everything from paper clips to nuclear submarines, as well as the $62 billion already earmarked for Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts. It was his job to ensure that the government got the most for its money and that competition for federal contracts--among companies as well as between government workers and private contractors--was fair. It was his job until he resigned on Sept. 16 and was subsequently arrested and charged with lying and obstructing a criminal investigation into Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff's dealings with the Federal Government.” (Time, 9/26/05)

The Pentagon
Joseph Schmitz, the Pentagon's former inspector general, has left for the private sector but remains the target of a Congressional inquiry. “Schmitz, who worked as an aide to former Reagan Administration Attorney General Ed Meese and whose father John was a Republican Congressman from Orange County, Calif., quit his post at the Pentagon following complaints from Senate Finance Committee chairman Charles Grassley, Republican of Iowa.” (Time, 9/26/05)

- Schmitz distinguished himself by his fascination with the army’s first inspector general, Baron Friedrich Von Steuben, a Revolutionary War hero. “Shortly after taking office, Schmitz made Von Steuben's legacy a focus. He spent three months personally redesigning the inspector general's seal to include the Von Steuben family motto, ‘Always under the protection of the Almighty.’”(The Nation, 9/25/05)

The FDA
Scott Gottlieb, named deputy commissioner for medical and scientific affairs, had extensive financial ties to the drug industry. “His official FDA biography notes that Gottlieb, 33, who got his medical degree at Mount Sinai School of Medicine, did a previous stint providing policy advice at the agency, as well as at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, and was a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. What the bio omits is that his most recent job was as editor of a popular Wall Street newsletter, the Forbes/Gottlieb Medical Technology Investor, in which he offered such tips as "Three Biotech Stocks to Buy Now." . . . . .. Jimmy Carter--era FDA Commissioner Donald Kennedy, a former Stanford University president and now executive editor-in-chief of the journal Science, [says] Gottlieb breaks the mold of appointees at that level who are generally career FDA scientists or experts well known in their field. "The appointment comes out of nowhere. I've never seen anything like that," says Kennedy.” (Time, 9/26/05)

Katrina Contracting:
More than 80 percent of the $1.5 billion in contracts signed by FEMA for Katrina work were awarded without bidding or with limited competition. (New York Times, 9/26/05)

Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown & Root, and the Shaw Group have both been represented by Joe Allbaugh, President Bush's former campaign manager and the former head of the Federal Emergency Management Agency - although Mr. Allbaugh says he does not help any of his clients obtain federal contracts. Kellogg, Brown & Root is the company that came up with those $100-per-bag laundry bills for work in Iraq. (New York Times, 9/27/05)

AshBritt, is a Pompano Beach, Fla., company with ties to Mississippi's governor, Haley Barbour - the former chairman of the Republican National Committee. AshBritt has nabbed $568 million in contracts for trash removal. (New York Times, 9/27/05)

Whistle Blowers Pay the Price in the Bush Administration

Frederick A. Black, veteran prosecutor reassigned after investigating Jack Abramoff. “The Justice Department's inspector general and the F.B.I. are looking into the demotion of a veteran federal prosecutor whose reassignment nearly three years ago shut down a criminal investigation of the Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff, current and former department officials report.” (New York Times, 9/26/05)

Lawrence Greenfeld, demoted for highlighting racial profiling. “The Bush administration is replacing the director of a small but critical branch of the Justice Department, months after he complained that senior political officials at the department were seeking to play down newly compiled data on the aggressive police treatment of black and Hispanic drivers.” (New York Times, 8/24/05)

Bunny Greenhouse, demoted after whistle-blowing. “A top Army contracting official who criticized a large, noncompetitive contract with the Halliburton Company for work in Iraq was demoted Saturday…” [New York Times, 8/29/05 ]

Colleen Rowley, FBI whistle-blower, retried from the FBI in 2004. “Like no other document to emerge from the current firestorm over the mistakes and missed signals that led to Sept. 11, the Rowley memo casts a searing light into the depths of government ineptitude.” (Time, 6/3/02)

General Shinseki, forced into retirement for questioning the war in Iraq. “Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz criticized the Army's chief of staff, Gen. Eric Shinseki, after Shinseki told Congress in February that the occupation could require "several hundred thousand troops." Wolfowitz called Shinseki's estimate ‘wildly off the mark.’” (USA Today, 6/2/03)

A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT

DAMAGED GOODS

1. George W. Bush, President of the United States of America

2. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist

3. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay

And there are many others...

You know who they are, don't you?

I rest my case

and I am not a lawyer.

One does not have to be a lawyer to know and insist upon the truth.

Libby Shaw

FIRST HAND REPORT FROM ANTI WAR PROTEST

Below you will find a first hand report from a local Houston activist, Mr. Stan Merriman, who attended the anti-war protest in Washington on Sept. 24. Thanks for attending and keeping us informed Stan! Needless to say, many of us here were distracted for a few days with Rita... Some folks are still chilling their jets in far flung parts of Texas, too, waiting for fuel and freeway space. LS


A REPORT FROM THE ANTI-WAR PROTEST
FRONT LINES IN D.C. SEPT. 24


Believe it. There were a MINIMUM of 300,000 people
there according to the Park Police…..more likely
500,000. And that was with all the trains from the
NYC area 3 hours late due to “repairs” !

Some stunning moments: we saw a crowd of demonstrators
surrounding a young marine in full dress uniform at
the pre-march rally who said he was there to lend his
voice. As the march formed to step out about an hour
late due to the crush of people making organization
difficult, leading the march were Cindy Sheehan, Jesse
Jackson Jr., Julian Bond and a host of other activist
leaders. In the front ranks were the Gold Star
Mothers for Peace, followed by Military Families Speak
Out and then my group, the Veterans for Peace. I was
so proud to be in the ranks of this superb group and
it was huge. Naturally, we did outstanding cadence
marches and chants sure to burn the Bushites. Behind
us, a Native group all the way from Alaska with their
drums and ritual dancing and another group from the
Lakota Nation who gave Cindy Sheenan a beautiful
hand-made quilt with their Star of Bravery design at
the concert later in the day. As the march
progressed, snaking around Pennsylvania avenue and
adjoining streets, we passed in front of the White
House and rendered appropriate middle finger salutes.
Yea I know, the Bushies were off directing the Rita
relief effort (yea, right) but the snipers on top of
the White House saw us and got the idea.

Huge crowds all along the route especially applauded
our Mothers and Veterans sections of the march.
Virtually every state was represented with massive
numbers, 5 times more than the United For Peace and
Justice leaders had hoped for.

Cops were benign and unlike our Houston Police, bent
on redeeming their earlier suppression of free
assembly by cutting us much slack. The signs and
costumed groups as well as drumming corps were awesome
and the most creative I have seen. I bought a car
magnet that says: “Ok, let’s pretend everything is
all right”. The size of the march was so huge we
were packed in like sardines for most of the route and
the snaking procession went on for hours, even after
the speeches and entertainment started later in the
day at the Washington monument. Counter demonstrators?
Oh, maybe 50. Media, Oh, maybe none. I heard Arron
Brown, CNN say “ I am getting furious email…..but
people have to understand that THE story is the gulf
coast” ! Yea, we know, CNN has turned into a one
story pony since Turner retired. Washington Post and
New York Times did give us good front page coverage
and acknowledged the massive turnout of 500,000.

At the rally later in the afternoon, with a massive
sound stage we heard speakers like Cindy, Jim
Hightower and Jesse Jackson. And marvelous protest
music from, among others Joan Baez and Steve Earle.
The Merriman’s left at around dinner time, exhilarated
and exhausted and so grateful to be in the company of
fellow Americans who love our country enough to once
again get out in front of our leaders, including
fellow Democrats to end yet another unjust and immoral
war waged in our name.



The present state of America is truly alarming
to every man who is capable of reflexion.
Thomas Paine 1776

DESPERATE BUSH SELLS LOUISIANA BACK TO THE FRENCH

Great piece sent by Charlie. LS

It's official folks!

President Bush Sells Louisiana Back to the French

President Bush and a giddy Jacques Chirac shake hands on the deal.

BATON ROUGE, LA. - The White House announced today that President Bush
has successfully sold the state of Louisiana back to the French at more
than double its original selling price of $11,250,000.

"This is a bold step forward for America ," said Bush. "And America
will be stronger and better as a result. I stand here today in unity
with French Prime Minister Jack Sharaq, who was so kind to accept my
offer of Louisiana in exchange for 25 million dollars cash."

The state, ravaged by Hurricane Katrina, will cost hundreds of billions
of dollars to rebuild.

"Jack understands full well that this one's a 'fixer upper,'" said
Bush. "He and the French people are quite prepared to pump out all that
water, and make Louisiana a decent place to live again. And they've got
a lot of work to do. But Jack's assured me, if it's not right, they're
going to fix it."

The move has been met with incredulity from the beleaguered residents
of Louisiana .

"Shuba-pie!" said New Orleans resident Willis Babineaux. "Frafer-perly
yum kom drabby sham!"

However, President Bush's decision has been widely lauded by
Republicans.

"This is an unexpected but brilliant move by the President," said Senate
Majority Leader Bill Frist. "Instead of spending billions and billions,
and billions of dollars rebuilding the state of Louisiana , we've just
made 25 million dollars in pure profit."

"This is indeed a smart move," commented Fox News analyst Brit Hume.
"Not only have we stopped the flooding in our own budget, we've made
money on the deal.

The money gained from 'T'he Louisiana Refund' is expected to be
immediately pumped into the rebuilding of Iraq .

ON THE CORRUPTED AND INCOMPETENT BUSH ADMINISTRATION

Rita bypassed Houston, fortunately, not that I wish her hell and misery on any city, town or people, except for maybe a few revolting and corrupt creeps that run our country. Ken sent this amazing article by Frank Rich of the NYT yesterday. This one is a gem. I love how Mr. Rich ties all the corrupted creeps together and gives us a bird's eye view of the very disturbing big picture. LS

The New York Times
September 25, 2005
Bring Back Warren Harding
By FRANK RICH

THERE are no coincidences. On Monday, as L. Dennis Kozlowski was slapped with 8 to 25 years in jail for looting Tyco International of some $150 million, the feds were making their first arrest of a high-ranking member of the Bush administration. The official was David Safavian, the chief of White House federal procurement policy who once worked for Jack Abramoff, the sleazy Republican lobbyist whose disreputable client list, in another noncoincidence, included Tyco. While it's an accident of timing that Mr. Safavian was collared at his suburban Virginia home just as Mr. Kozlowski was sent to the slammer in New York, the two events could not better bracket a corrupt era worthy of the Gilded Age.

Ours will be remembered as the Enron era. Enron itself is a distant memory - much like all that circa 2000 talk of a smoothly efficient C.E.O. presidency led by a Harvard M.B.A. and a former chief executive of Halliburton. But even as American business has since been purged by prosecutions and reforms, the mutant Enron version of the C.E.O. culture still rules in Washington: uninhibited cronyism, cooked books, special-favors networks, the banishment of whistle-blowers and accountability. More than ideology, this ethos has sabotaged even the best of American intentions, whether in Iraq or New Orleans. Unchecked, it promises greater disasters to come.

As recently as 10 days ago, when he resigned before his arrest, Mr. Safavian was the man who set purchasing policy for the entire federal government, including that related to Hurricane Katrina relief. The White House might as well have appointed a contestant from "The Apprentice." Before entering public service, Mr. Safavian's main claim to fame was as a lobbyist whose clients included Indian gaming interests and thuggish African regimes. Mr. Safavian now faces charges of lying and obstructing the investigation of Mr. Abramoff, the Tom DeLay-Ralph Reed-Grover Norquist pal who is being investigated by more agencies than looked into 9/11. Mr. Abramoff's greasy K Street influence-peddling network makes the Warren Harding gang, which operated out of its own infamous "little green house on K Street," look like selfless stewards of the public good.

You know that the arrest of Mr. Safavian, one of three known Abramoff alumni to migrate into the administration, is the start of something big. Alberto Gonzales's Justice Department announced it only after Mr. Safavian had appeared in court and had been released without bail. The gambit was clearly intended to keep the story off television, and it worked.

It won't for long. The Enron odor emanating from Mr. Safavian is of a piece with the rest of the cronyism in the Katrina preparedness package. The handing off of FEMA from President Bush's 2000 campaign manager, Joe Allbaugh, to Mr. Allbaugh's even less qualified buddy, Michael Brown, in 2003 is now notorious. (The two men have been friends for 25 years but were not college roommates, as I wrote here last week.) But that's only the beginning: the placement of hacks like "Brownie" and Mr. Safavian in crucial jobs hasn't been slowed one whit by what went down on their watch in New Orleans.

Witness the nomination of Julie Myers as the new head of immigration and customs enforcement at the Homeland Security Department. Though the White House attacked the diplomat Joseph Wilson for nepotism because he undertook a single pro bono intelligence mission while his wife was at the C.I.A., it thought nothing of handing this huge job to a nepotistic twofer: Ms. Myers is the niece of Gen. Richard Myers and has just married the chief of staff for the homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff. Her qualifications for running an agency with more than 20,000 employees and a $4 billion budget include serving as an associate counsel under Kenneth Starr; in that job, she helped mastermind the costly and doomed prosecution of Susan McDougal, and was outwitted at every turn by the defense lawyer Mark Geragos.

Ms. Myers is only the latest example of Mr. Chertoff's rolling the dice with Americans' safety during his brief tenure in Homeland Security. After the bombings in London in July, he vowed to maximize his department's "finite human and financial capital to attain the optimal state of preparedness." Yet the very same day, the president nominated Tracy Henke as Homeland Security's new executive director of the Office of State and Local Government Coordination and Preparedness. Ms. Henke, a John Ashcroft political appointee at the Justice Department, has since been unmasked as an Enron-style spinner of numbers. As Eric Lichtblau of The Times reported in August, it was she who ordered the highly regarded nonpartisan head of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Lawrence Greenfeld, to delete a reference to politically embarrassing data in a government press release for a report on racial profiling. When Mr. Greenfeld complained, he was demoted.

Imagine Ms. Henke, in her Homeland Security job, having sway over press releases about our disaster readiness. There is likely to be nothing but good news until it's too late. But if the hiring of the likes of Ms. Henke, Ms. Myers and Mr. Safavian is half of the equation in Enron governance, the other half is the punishing of veteran civil servants like Mr. Greenfeld for doing their jobs honestly. Even as it fills its ranks with Abramoff golf-junket partners, political flunkies and underemployed relatives, the administration silences those who, like Sherron Watkins at Enron, might blow the whistle on any Kozlowski or Ebbers or Rigas fleecing or betraying the taxpayers. Three weeks before Mr. Safavian's arrest, the Army Corps of Engineers demoted another procurement official, Bunnatine Greenhouse, who was a 20-year veteran in her field. Her crime was not obstructing justice but pursuing it by vehemently questioning irregularities in the awarding of some $7 billion worth of no-bid contracts in Iraq to the Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root.

Ms. Greenhouse and Mr. Greenfeld are only two of the many whistle-blowers done in by this administration so far. (Congressman Rahm Emanuel, Democrat of Illinois, lists nine on his Web site.) Even top government officials who are not whistle-blowers, merely truth-tellers, are axed. Lawrence Lindsey, the president's chief economic adviser, was pushed out after he accurately projected the cost of the Iraq war at $100 billion to $200 billion. Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, was shunted aside after he accurately estimated the number of required troops ("several hundred thousand") for securing Iraq. Paul Wolfowitz and Donald Rumsfeld, who presented rosy scenarios of getting the job done with Iraqi oil income and low troop deployments, stayed on to bungle the war.

Their errors were compounded when the administration staffed the post-Saddam American occupation with exactly the same kind of appointees it would later bring to homeland security: the two heads of "private sector development" in Iraq were a former Bush fund-raiser in Connecticut and a venture capitalist who just happened to be Ari Fleischer's brother. As The Washington Post reported last year, major roles in the L. Paul Bremer regime were given to 20-somethings with no foreign service experience or knowledge of Arabic simply because they had posted their résumés at the Heritage Foundation, the same conservative think tank where Mr. Bremer had chaired a task force.

The damage done to the mission in Iraq and homeland security alike by Enron governance is immeasurable. Administration apologists who now claim that hurricane relief will bring still more examples of innovative, C.E.O.-style governmental enterprise (Mr. Bush's "Gulf Opportunity Zone," for instance) conveniently sidestep the harsh truth that such schemes are destined to be as empty and corrupt as Andrew Fastow's Raptor partnerships at Enron once they're staffed from the apparently infinite crony talent pool.

YET it's not only the administration that is to blame, any more than it is only the executives who are at fault when a corporation rots. Culpability also belongs to the board that rubber-stamps the shenanigans - to wit, Congress. Republicans in the Senate are led by Bill Frist, who, in the grandest Enron manner, claimed last week that it was to avoid a conflict of interest that his supposed "blind trust" unloaded all of his holdings in a Frist family-founded company just before its stock tanked. (Federal prosecutors and the S.E.C. are investigating.) As for the Democrats, they are nonpareil at posturing about the unstoppable nomination of John Roberts - a conservative, to be sure, but the rare Bush nominee who seems both qualified for his job and unsullied by ethical blemishes. Yet when David Safavian was up for a job involving hundreds of billions of dollars, and much of his dubious résumé was fully known, he was approved by the ranking Democrat, Joe Lieberman, and all his colleagues of both parties on the Governmental Affairs Committee.

Which is to say that the rest of us, the individual shareholders in government who have voted in our Enron-era politicians, are responsible, too.

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

MISERY POSED ON BEAUMONT BY HURRICANE RITA

Power in Houston is still up and running, at least for now, so I can send a piece sent by Ken. LS

This was sent to me from a friend down in Texas. -K

Beaumont is now majorly threatened by Rita... it is right on the coast, and a pretty poor town. Mostly refineries. People there are always aware of the danger of storms, and also of industrial accidents amongst the pipelines and smokestacks. So a few years back the city contracted for a complete evacuation package... 200 buses and 700 ambulances, to be supplied at instant notice in time of danger to get the good citizens of Beaumont outa there. And the mayor called for them a couple days ago, and they arrived. But before the evacuation could begin, the State of Texas, through proclamation of Governor Goodhair (Governor Rick Perry -K), COMMANDEERED the vehicles, all but twenty ambulances. Took them away to help evacuate Houston. Left the citizens of Beaumont, who had paid for their own evacuation services with their taxes, pretty much on their own. At that late hour, they had to scramble to get everyone (and that meant everyone) out of Beaumont and inland. People were pissed. Republican leadership.

XXX also noticed large lines of enormous tankers taking god-knows- what away from the coast. There are many decades of very bad chemical waste there, in a town which may very well be under Gulf waters in a day or two.

TOO MANY PASSES

I have been a tad distracted by hurricane preparations to read anything, much less post pieces. Now that we're hunkered down, so to speak, I have a few hours before the power goes out.

Fortunately my friend Ken has been sending me pieces which I can read by flashlight tonight. Not even Hurricane Rita can shift my focus on what needs to be done in the political realm in 2006 and 2008. I am sure you have noticed the gas shortages and freeway nightmares with the massive evacuation of Houston and the Texas coastal areas. Tom DeLay, by the way, fought the proposal years ago to install high speed trains in the Houston/Austin/Dallas corridor. All the federal funding for transportation goes into highways. You saw how great and efficient Texas highways are on your TV sets, didn't you? Products of another republican state and federal administration screw ups and corruption.

Great piece sent from Ken today:

The writer in this wonderful piece makes the point that Bungle the Clown was given the benefit of the doubt when he ignored the hijack warnings in the August, 2001 intel briefing, and when he let Bin Laden get away at Tora Bora, because the newspapers felt that "There was a basic presumption of competence surrounding the administration. Everybody assumed there must have been some ambiguities; that they couldn't have screwed up that badly."  But now, in light of clear evidence of his, and his teams, startling incompetance, we need to look at these earlier bungles, too.

I, for one, and you for two I bet, never presumed competance on the part of those boneheads, but this piece is just great. -K

Too many free passes
Jonathan Chait
LA Times
http://tinyurl.com/7zktc

September 23, 2005

NOW THAT all but the most partisan and stubborn defenders of President Bush agree that he screwed up his response to Katrina, and nearly as many agree that he screwed up the occupation of Iraq, it probably seems unnecessary to continue beating up the administration over those failures of the past.

Instead, I say we dwell on some other administration foul-ups from even further in the past that most people have forgotten about by now. You know, in the spirit of magnanimity.

I'm thinking specifically of two controversies. First, the administration's failure to act on intelligence that could have stopped the Sept. 11 attacks. And second, its refusal to commit ground troops to the battle of Tora Bora in 2001, leading to the escape of Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants.

In both cases, the administration received the benefit of the doubt. In light of what we now know about the administration's incompetence, however, this benefit is wholly unwarranted.

Start with 9/11. Beginning in May 2001, it began to come to light that the administration had considerable intelligence about possible terrorist attacks. The FBI had warned the administration that terrorists were planning to hijack airplanes. Bush received a memo in August 2001 titled, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

The administration insisted that none of the warnings focused on the possibility that terrorists would hijack planes and crash them into buildings. As Condoleezza Rice insisted at the time: "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. All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking."

This defense was, first of all, completely insipid. If you suspect terrorists are going to hijack planes, then you step up security to keep them off the planes. What they plan to do with the planes is pretty secondary. Suppose you knew they planned to fly them into buildings. It's not like your response would be to let the terrorists on board but cover all the major landmarks with enormous foam-rubber cushions.

Anyway, this ludicrous defense wasn't even true. It came out earlier this month that U.S. aviation officials were warned as early as 1998 that Al Qaeda sought to "hijack a commercial jet and slam it into a U.S. landmark."

And yet, while the administration took some heat, in the end it got a pass. An L.A. Times editorial in 2002 typified the reaction: "So intelligence sources informed President Bush in August that Osama bin Laden's terrorists might attempt to hijack airplanes? Excuse us, but administration officials have good reason to look perplexed as they wonder aloud what the increasingly indignant chorus of critics would have had the president do with that amorphous warning."

The administration got a similar pass on Tora Bora. This happened at the end of the Afghanistan campaign, when we had Bin Laden and about 800 of his top men surrounded. Rather than use the 4,000 U.S. troops that were in the area, Army Gen. Tommy Franks instead relied on poorly trained, ill-equipped Afghan tribesman of dubious loyalty. Predictably, Bin Laden got away.

Here, too, the excuses were always absurd. "We don't know to this day whether Mr. Bin Laden was at Tora Bora," wrote Franks (who since retired and endorsed Bush) a year ago. In fact, according to a document on the Pentagon website, we did have intelligence that Bin Laden was there. But even if we weren't certain, was that a good reason not to do our best to try to capture him? Should you avoid using your best troops to surround the enemy because, hey, the top bad guy might not be inside?

I suspect Tora Bora never seriously hurt Bush for the same basic reason the 9/11 stuff didn't hurt him: There was a basic presumption of competence surrounding the administration. Everybody assumed there must have been some ambiguities; that they couldn't have screwed up that badly.

The Bush administration probably wouldn't have enjoyed this presumption if these stories came out after Iraq and Katrina. Because all of a sudden the thesis that it screwed up just that badly ˜ that a minimally competent administration would have acted differently ˜ looks pretty compelling.

MORE ON THE PILLAGING OF AMERICA BY BUSH

BUSH MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET PROCUREMENT CHIEF ARRESTED AFTER QUITTING.
Found on Raw Story.com

BUSHIES CONTINUE TO PILLAGE AND PLUNDER AMERICA

IMMIGRATION MEMO INTENDED FOR ROVE ARRIVES ON DEMOCRAT'S FAX

MEMO FOR ROVE ARRIVES TO DEMS INSTEAD

MORE DIE IN IRAQ THANKS TO BUSH

MORE DIE IN IRAQ

PRETTY HARD TO IMAGINE: CINDY SHEEHAN SHUT DOWN IN NYC... OF ALL PLACES INDEED.

As a native of NYC, and, as a transplanted Texan, I am deeply and truly ashamed of both cities/states...one red...one blue...so to speak....yet both are so obviously purple. Who, by the way, made up the blue and red crap? Rove and the Nut Job GOP Spin Machine?

IS NYC as bad as Crawford, Texas? It seems so, sadly. Who in NYC is on the Bush payroll, I wonder?

SHEEHAN SHUT DOWN IN NYC

BUSH PILLAGING AND LOOTING IN NEW ORLEANS
By Les Payne of Newsday.com

Abstract:

Such pilferage in New Orleans, as terrible as Fox News made it out to be, will pale in insignificance compared to what's in store when the Bush administration lets the contracts to the GOP contributors to rebuild the Crescent City and the gulf states. Such looting on the grand scale will likely prove too sophisticated for U.S. media analysts, who gag on a gnat and swallow an elephant.

"PILLAGING, LOOTING - THESE GUYS ARE PROS

HOUSTON KNOWS BETTER THAN TO TRUST IN BUSH WHEN A HURRICANE COMES OUR WAY

Oh! By the way, the city of Houston, which is 50 miles inland from Galveston, i.e. the Gulf and at sea level, with an added population of at least 100,000, is preparing for a perhaps soon-to-be Hurricane Rita. It is acutely obvious to everyone here that we are on our own, should Rita come our way. We will not, under any circumstances, indeed, depend upon the Bush government to "be there" to bail us out, because we know for a fact they will not.

Experience has proven, thus far, that some incompetent political hack or buddy, rather than an experienced professional, has been appointed to oversee the task to assist Americans in their greatest time of need.

Fortunately, even in the so obviously politically and socially screwed on all levels (sorry to be so vulgar!) the so-called RED state of Texas, in the refreshing, diverse and can do city of PURPLE Houston, it is crystal clear that no one, at least here, trusts a Bush appointed political hack after Katrina.

Thank God.

Trust in Bush is not only US, but global hell on earth.

Lack of trust in Bush is U.S. and global salvation.

Adios, bon nuit and good night. LS

BUSH UNMASKED

I've neglected this blog lately for 2 reasons. One, as I mentioned previously, the mainstream has finally realized that the Bush administration is nothing more than a house o f cards, built upon deceit, lies and the imperative to make a lot of money for themselves and their buddies, all at the expense of Americans. Nothing else matters. It took a Category 5 Hurricane in which reporters witnessed first hand the consequences of a gutted federal program to accomplish this. I can finally turn on the TV and see real news for a change.

Another reason for neglecting this blog is that I have turned my attention to studying the voting record of one of my state Senators who will run for re-election in 2006. In the little time I have had to dedicate to this endeavor, I have discovered, in no uncertain terms, a fact that I have always known intuitively. The GOP routinely votes for issues that advance the interests and needs of the upper level income earners and the wealthy. They systematically vote against any and all bill or amendment that will enhance the lives or livelihoods of those less fortunate, i.e. those who make under $200K per year. That, my dear, friends, is a huge chunk of America's population.... If you look over your GOP elected officials' voting records, you will discover that they do not represent the needs and interests of most of America. What the GOP says has nothing to do with its actions. They talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. And they bank on the fact that you are not reading their voting records.

Moving on to news in the America of an unmasked Bush Administration. LS

FORMER PRESIDENT CLINTON LASHES OUT AT BUSH ON IRAQ, KATRINA AND THE BUDGET

CLINTON LAUNCHES WITHERING ATTACK ON BUSH

POLL AFTER KATRINA REVEALS THAT 50% WOULD VOTE FOR DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS

We have a 12 point lead over the GOP. Wonder if Rove will try to rig the polls.

FED UP WITH BUSH AND THE GOP

INTEL AGENTS SAY WE ARE MAKING THE VERY SAME MISTAKES IN IRAQ AS IN VIETNAM

What the hell else is new? Those of us who protested the VN war have been screaming about this since Day 1.

IRAQ NOW THE SAME HELL AS VIET NAM

"FEMA: A LEGACY OF WASTE"
Found via Buzz Flash, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel exposes FEMA's history of gross and appalling waste and fraud. This article reveals in clear terms how the Bush administration was willling to put the American public at risk.

"FEMA: A LEGACY OF WASTE"

BUSH STICKS IT TO AMERICA ONCE AGAIN. HE WILL SLASH THE BUDGETS IMPACTING SENIORS, EDUCATION AND VETERAN'S BENEFITS TO PAY FOR KATRINA SO THE MILLIONAIRES WON'T HAVE TO. THEY STILL GET THEIR TAX CUTS.

MORE CAKE SHOVED DOWN AMERICAN'S THROAT

GOP TO BLAME KATRINA ON ENVIRONMENTALISTS

Rove, the prince of darkness, deceit and evil, is hard at work. LS

Found on Truthout.org

Read below or click
HERE


E-mail Suggests Government Seeking to Blame Groups
By Jerry Mitchell
The Clarion-Ledger

Friday 16 September 2005

Federal officials appear to be seeking proof to blame the flood of New Orleans on environmental groups, documents show.

The Clarion-Ledger has obtained a copy of an internal e-mail the US Department of Justice sent out this week to various US attorneys' offices: "Has your district defended any cases on behalf of the (US) Army Corps of Engineers against claims brought by environmental groups seeking to block or otherwise impede the Corps work on the levees protecting New Orleans? If so, please describe the case and the outcome of the litigation."

Cynthia Magnuson, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, said Thursday she couldn't comment "because it's an internal e-mail."

Shown a copy of the e-mail, David Bookbinder, senior attorney for Sierra Club, remarked, "Why are they (Bush administration officials) trying to smear us like this?"

The Sierra Club and other environmental groups had nothing to do with the flooding that resulted from Hurricane Katrina that killed hundreds, he said. "It's unfortunate that the Bush administration is trying to shift the blame to environmental groups. It doesn't surprise me at all."

Federal officials say the e-mail was prompted by a congressional inquiry but wouldn't comment further.

Whoever is behind the e-mail may have spotted the Sept. 8 issue of National Review Online that chastised the Sierra Club and other environmental groups for suing to halt the corps' 1996 plan to raise and fortify 303 miles of Mississippi River levees in Louisiana, Mississippi and Arkansas.

The corps settled the litigation in 1997, agreeing to hold off on some work until an environmental impact could be completed. The National Review article concluded: "Whether this delay directly affected the levees that broke in New Orleans is difficult to ascertain."

The problem with that conclusion?

The levees that broke causing New Orleans to flood weren't Mississippi River levees. They were levees that protected the city from Lake Pontchartrain levees on the other side of the city.

When Katrina struck, the hurricane pushed tons of water from the Gulf of Mexico into Lake Pontchartrain, which borders the city to the north. Corps officials say the water from the lake cleared the levees by 3 feet. It was those floodwaters, they say, that caused the levees to degrade until they ruptured, causing 80 percent of New Orleans to flood.

Bookbinder said the purpose of the litigation by the Sierra Club and others in 1996 was where the corps got the dirt for the project. "We had no objections to levees," he said. "We said, 'Just don't dig film materials out of the wetlands. Get the dirt from somewhere else.'"

If you listen to what some conservatives say about environmentalists, he said, "We're responsible for most of the world's ills."

In 1977, the corps wanted to build a 25-mile-long barrier and gate system to protect New Orleans on the east side. Both environmental groups and fishermen opposed the project, saying it would choke off water into Lake Pontchartrain.

After litigation, corps officials abandoned the idea, deciding instead to build higher levees. "They came up with a cheaper alternative," Bookbinder said. "We didn't object to raising the levees."

John Hall, a spokesman for the corps in New Orleans, said the barrier the corps was proposing in the 1970s would only stand up to a weak Category 3 hurricane, not a Category 4 hurricane like Katrina. "How much that would have prevented anything, I'm not sure," he said.

Since 1999, corps officials have studied the concept of building huge floodgates to prevent flooding in New Orleans from a Category 4 or 5 hurricane.

Although the Federal Emergency Management Agency in 2001 listed a hurricane striking New Orleans as one of the top three catastrophic events the nation could face (the others being a terrorist attack on New York City and an earthquake in San Francisco), funding for corps projects aimed at curbing flooding in southeast Louisiana lagged.

US Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-LA, has said the White House cut $400 million from corps' requests for flood control money in the area.

In fiscal 2006, the corps had hoped to receive up to $10 million in funding for a six-year feasibility study on such floodgates. According to a recent estimate, the project would take 10 years to build and cost $2.5 billion.

"Our understanding is the locals would like to go to that," Hall said. "If I were local, I'd want it."

NEW TWIST IN DESPERATE BUSH'S POSTURING

It seems that Bush The Pathetic Puppet is now attempting to sell himself as FDR (I am desperately trying not to go into acute cardiac arrest at the mere thought) by proposing a kind of/sort of New Deal. It shows what extreme the Cheney/Rove driven right wing GOP will go to deceive the American people. Bush/Rove/Cheney have no principles at all. They talk the talk but don’t walk the walk. (Like, none of them served in the U.S. military and all are in the Viet Nam war age bracket.) Aside from accumulating $$$$ at the expense of so many, what have the 3 greedy stooges done for humanity? What have they personally contributed to America? Do they know the meaning of altruism? Probably not. Why would they be deserving of our trust?

Bush blew a lot of hot wind and smoke tonight. He tried to do a high wire act because his approval ratings are in the sewer and his party is on the ropes, where it should be, the rubber-stamping cowards that they are.

Bush’s performance was, as usual, all staged and couched by his handlers, mainly Rove. If reporters were actually present, they were not allowed to ask questions. Of course not. Any questions posed might deviate from the script written by Rove.

Rove, the quintessential political hack and whore of postmodern times, is known for his brilliance in fooling us. Down the line, history might prove him a traitor.

Tonight Bush promised billions but did not guarantee that a penny would get to where it needs to go. No oversight or accountability was proposed.

Do you honestly believe that the funds promised to reconstruct the Gulf region, our money, folks, our money, will go to where it is needed the most, without oversight from a person or group that is not politically joined at the hip with Bush/Cheney/Rove?

If you do, you are really, really stupid and I would feel sorry for you if the stakes weren’t so high for all of us.

If you should have a small segment of a brain, you would know that most of the funding promised will go into the pockets of Bush/Cheney/Rove and their hacks and cronies. LS

Sent by Ken - NOT THE NEW DEAL, by Paul Krugman, NYT.



NOT THE NEW DEAL
By Paul Krugman of the NYT

September 16, 2005
Not the New Deal
By PAUL KRUGMAN

Now it begins: America's biggest relief and recovery program since the New Deal. And the omens aren't good.

It's a given that the Bush administration, which tried to turn Iraq into a laboratory for conservative economic policies, will try the same thing on the Gulf Coast. The Heritage Foundation, which has surely been helping Karl Rove develop the administration's recovery plan, has already published a manifesto on post-Katrina policy. It calls for waivers on environmental rules, the elimination of capital gains taxes and the private ownership of public school buildings in the disaster areas. And if any of the people killed by Katrina, most of them poor, had a net worth of more than $1.5 million, Heritage wants to exempt their heirs from the estate tax.

Still, even conservatives admit that deregulation, tax cuts and privatization won't be enough. Recovery will require a lot of federal spending. And aside from the effect on the deficit - we're about to see the spectacle of tax cuts in the face of both a war and a huge reconstruction effort - this raises another question: how can discretionary government spending take place on that scale without creating equally large-scale corruption?

It's possible to spend large sums honestly, as Franklin D. Roosevelt demonstrated in the 1930's. F.D.R. presided over a huge expansion of federal spending, including a lot of discretionary spending by the Works Progress Administration. Yet the image of public relief, widely regarded as corrupt before the New Deal, actually improved markedly.

How did that happen? The answer is that the New Deal made almost a fetish out of policing its own programs against potential corruption. In particular, F.D.R. created a powerful "division of progress investigation" to look into complaints of malfeasance in the W.P.A. That division proved so effective that a later Congressional investigation couldn't find a single serious irregularity it had missed.

This commitment to honest government wasn't a sign of Roosevelt's personal virtue; it reflected a political imperative. F.D.R.'s mission in office was to show that government activism works. To maintain that mission's credibility, he needed to keep his administration's record clean.

But George W. Bush isn't F.D.R. Indeed, in crucial respects he's the anti-F.D.R.

President Bush subscribes to a political philosophy that opposes government activism - that's why he has tried to downsize and privatize programs wherever he can. (He still hopes to privatize Social Security, F.D.R.'s biggest legacy.) So even his policy failures don't bother his strongest supporters: many conservatives view the inept response to Katrina as a vindication of their lack of faith in government, rather than as a reason to reconsider their faith in Mr. Bush.

And to date the Bush administration, which has no stake in showing that good government is possible, has been averse to investigating itself. On the contrary, it has consistently stonewalled corruption investigations and punished its own investigators if they try to do their jobs.

That's why Mr. Bush's promise last night that he will have "a team of inspectors general reviewing all expenditures" rings hollow. Whoever these inspectors general are, they'll be mindful of the fate of Bunnatine Greenhouse, a highly regarded auditor at the Army Corps of Engineers who suddenly got poor performance reviews after she raised questions about Halliburton's contracts in Iraq. She was demoted late last month.

Turning the funds over to state and local governments isn't the answer, either. F.D.R. actually made a point of taking control away from local politicians; then as now, patronage played a big role in local politics.

And our sympathy for the people of Mississippi and Louisiana shouldn't blind us to the realities of their states' political cultures. Last year the newsletter Corporate Crime Reporter ranked the states according to the number of federal public-corruption convictions per capita. Mississippi came in first, and Louisiana came in third.

Is there any way Mr. Bush could ensure an honest recovery program? Yes - he could insulate decisions about reconstruction spending from politics by placing them in the hands of an autonomous agency headed by a political independent, or, if no such person can be found, a Democrat (as a sign of good faith).

He didn't do that last night, and probably won't. There's every reason to believe the reconstruction of the Gulf Coast, like the failed reconstruction of Iraq, will be deeply marred by cronyism and corruption.