Using Propaganda To Start A War

A study conducted by two nonprofit journalism organizations found what a lot of people have known for years — President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds (935 to be exact) of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following 9/11.

The statements “were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidely false pretenses” according to the conclusion of the study. In other words, the Bush administration knowingly used false propaganda to push their war.

The Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism published the study on their web site.

935 False Statements In Two Years

935 false statements were found in transcripts, news clips, more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches and interviews by the study in the two-year period. Bush and other members of his administration stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them, had links to al-Qaida or both.

In an overview of the study, written by Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism noted “it is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida. In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003.”

Other officials besides Bush named in the study were: Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House Press Secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Leading the way with the most false statements was Bush with 232 false statements regarding weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq’s links to al-Qaida. Powell was second with 244 false statements regarding weapons of mass destruction and 10 about Iraq’s links to al-Qaida. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz with 85, Rice with 56, Cheney with 48, and McClellan with 14.

Pentagon Officials and Republican Leaders Involved

The study noted that the false statements dramatically increased in August 2002 as Congress considered a war resolution, then escalated through the mid-term elections, spiking even higher from January 2003 to the eve of the invasion. Aside from Bush and the other seven top administration officials, Pentagon officials and Republican leaders in Congress also routinely sounded false war alarms.

The study lists 6 examples of false public statements made in the run-up to war and concluded that “the cumulative effect of these false statements – amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts – was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war.”

“Some journalists – indeed, even some entire news organizations – have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, ‘independent’ validation of the Bush administration’s false statements about Iraq,” it said.

Bush Ignored or Distorted Available Intelligence

Growing numbers of critics, including former government officials have publicly accused Bush and his inner circle of ignoring or distorting the available intelligence. Critics say that in the end it was the calculated drumbeat of false information and public pronouncements that ultimately misled the American people and this nation’s allies on their way to war.

The study also notes that Bush and the top officials of his administration have for the most part avoided the harsh, sustained glare of formal scrutiny about their personal responsibility for the litany of repeated, false statements in the run-up to war in Iraq.

No Congressional investigation into what exactly was going on inside the Bush White House during that period was ever conducted. Congressional oversight focused almost entirely on the quality of the U.S. government’s pre-war intelligence, not the judgment, public statements, or public accountability of its highest officials, of which only four — Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz — have testified before Congress about Iraq.

With Congress constantly bending over and giving the Bush administration everything it wants with no accountability, against the publics wishes, destroying human rights, privacies and the constitution along the way, it comes as no surprise that this administration hasn’t yet been held accountable for anything. It’s long past time to hold Congress, the Senate and the Bush administration accountable for all the lies and destruction of human rights and privacies, not to mention the theft of our U.S. government.

The study calls into question the repeated assertions of Bush administration officials that they were the unwitting victims of bad intelligence and helps answer two all-too-familiar question that apply to Bush and his top advisers: What did they know, and when did they know it?

It makes one wonder how many lies he’s told since those two years too…

Links to More Information

Links to the information above as well as numerous links to and snippets of other articles of interest can be found below:

Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein’s Iraq article from The Center for Public Integrity

United States House of Representatives home page

United States Senate home page

FISA: Let’s Fight article from Daily Kos:

“Congress is back, and so is the fight over whether the nation’s telecommunication companies–and the Bush administration–will skate on the charges of spying on American citizens without a warrant. If the Congress grants telcos the amnesty they and the administration are seeking, investigations on the scope of the illegal spying won’t go forward, and we might never know the full extent of this administration’s illegal activity against American citizens.

The news that the telcos pulled their wiretaps because the weren’t getting paid reveals two truths: the telcos aren’t great patriots doing their duty for national security–they’re greedy and willing to break the law if they can boost the bottom line; the Bush administration doesn’t care enough about national security to pay the freaking bill for it and is using this issue as yet another bludgeon to beat up on Democrats.”

Is John Edwards Really a Fighter? He Needs to Prove It on Telecom Immunity article from AlterNet:

“Edwards should challenge his rivals Obama and Clinton to go back to Washington, DC and fight against retroactive immunity for the telecoms.”

A soldier’s response to the debate about the war in Iraq between Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee video from YouTube

For Sale: West’s deadly nuclear secrets article from The TimesOnline UK:

“A WHISTLEBLOWER has made a series of extraordinary claims about how corrupt government officials allowed Pakistan and other states to steal nuclear weapons secrets.

Sibel Edmonds, a 37-year-old former Turkish language translator for the FBI, listened into hundreds of sensitive intercepted conversations while based at the agency’s Washington field office.

Edmonds, a fluent speaker of Turkish and Farsi, was recruited by the FBI in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Her previous claims about incompetence inside the FBI have been well documented in America.

She has given evidence to closed sessions of Congress and the 9/11 commission, but many of the key points of her testimony have remained secret. She has now decided to divulge some of that information after becoming disillusioned with the US authorities’ failure to act.”

Unmuzzling High School Journalists article from The Washington Post:
“What happened at the Supreme Court 20 years ago tomorrow has been long forgotten by most Americans — if they ever heard about it at all. Unlike the better-known decisions of the last century, the ruling handed down on Jan. 13, 1988, had nothing to do with race or abortion rights. It didn’t become fodder for presidential candidates and hasn’t galvanized voters on either the left or right.
Yet over the past two decades, the court’s ruling in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, which concerned high school newspapers, has had far-reaching consequences. Not only has it changed the way journalism is taught at many schools, it has made it more difficult for high school students to learn the important lessons about democracy that come from publishing — or simply reading — serious newspapers.
Before 1988, the precedent governing newspapers at public high schools was a 1969 Supreme Court decision called Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District, in which the court upheld the right of students to wear antiwar armbands in school, writing that neither students nor teachers “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.”

Essential BBC documentaries not shown on US TV article from Daily Kos:
“Adam Curtis exposes the public manipulation we sense but usually don’t understand. His BBC documentaries are legendary in Britain but practically unknown in the US. An American network executive who wouldn’t even let his name be used said “we would be crucified if we showed that here”. These documentaries are like a graduate course in how the American and British public has been herded like cattle since the end of World War I.
Each episode is about an hour and all are jaw dropping-ly insightful. Adam Curtis other BBC Documentaries, The Trap, The Mayfair Set, and Pandoras Box build on The Century of the Self and the Power of Nightmares.”

CIA Hid Other Tapes From 9/11 Commission article from OpEdNews
Diebold to Change Its Name article from Threat Level
This is What A Police State Looks Like video from
President BUSH PARDON’s HIMSELF against POTENTIAL WARCRIMES video from YouTube
Spychief Plan To Police Internet Is Likely Tied To S 1959, Thought Crime Prevention Bill article from
“Would Americans be outraged if the government decided to read every piece of our personal mail? Think about it, letters and notes which are sent to a lover, things we all say in anger, regret later, and never follow-through on? What about confidential financial information, plans to trump your competitor with a new product or service, and a host of personal issues that are too numerous to mention? People in the United States have become accustomed to their privacy and believe it is one of those “unalienable constitutional rights” which are guaranteed to all American citizens that most of us take for granted. Our constitution and Bill of Rights demand it, yet here we are, one year before Bush leaves office, and the government is planning on doing almost exactly what I described. The only difference is that instead of snail-mail (which can also be opened), the government’s proposed directive covers any and all computer communications and correspondence that everyday citizens se nd and receive on their computer systems. This includes any all financial information as well as personal matters of anyone in your home;the communications of your teenagers will be monitored as well, and issues that are normally kept within the family unit(s) will suddenly become part of your governmental profile.”
Why and How “The Global War On Terror” Is A Lie article from OpEdNews
George Bush Suffers Mutiny by Admiral Mike Mullen article from OpEdNews:
“It seems that nobody is listening to George Bush anymore including his own military leaders. Even they have now realized that the Holy American Emperor is suffering from the ravages of alcohol and syphillis caused dementia. How does the chain of command work? If King George gives the order today to “Nuke Iran”, does the military have to obey his commandment?
George Bush invaded Iraq for several reasons. He told two BBC reporters that Jesus Christ told him to. George Bush publicly declared a Christian Crusade against Islam. He invaded Iraq to free the Iraqi people of the tyranny of Saddam Hussein. George Bush invaded Iraq to stop Saddam Hussein from once again conquering Kuwait and then Saudi Arabia and choking off the American supply of oil and crippling the American economy. He invaded Iraq as revenge against the Muslim people for attacking the United States on 9/11. The American people are calling for King George’s head now like Monday morning quarterbacks all the while forgetting that in 2003 when Natalie Maines mildly criticised George Bush to cheering crowds in London the American people collectively burned Natalie Maines at the stake. Isn’t that always the way with prophets?”

Dennis Kucinich’s Fight to Bring Credibility to the Democratic Party article from AlterNet

Twenty-five U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11 article from OpEdNews:

“A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash.  It’s impossible,” said Lt. Col. Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force (ret). [1]  With doctoral degrees in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Col. Bowman served as Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter.

“There’s a second group of facts having to do with the cover up,” continued Col. Bowman.  “Taken together these things prove that high levels of our government don’t want us to know what happened and who’s responsible. Who gained from 9/11?  Who covered up crucial information about 9/11?  And who put out the patently false stories about 9/11 in the first place?  When you take those three things together, I think the case is pretty clear that it’s highly placed individuals in the administration with all roads passing through Dick Cheney.”

Regarding the failure of NORAD to intercept the four hijacked planes on 9/11, Col. Bowman said, “I’m an old interceptor pilot.  I know the drill. I’ve done it.  I know how long it takes.  I know the rules. … Critics of the government story on 9/11 have said: ‘Well, they knew about this, and they did nothing’.  That’s not true.  If our government had done nothing that day and let normal procedure be followed, those planes, wherever they were, would have been intercepted, the Twin Towers would still be standing and thousands of dead Americans would still be alive.” [2]”

Living in Fear and Paying a High Cost in Heart Risk article from The New York Times:

“Which is more of a threat to your health: Al Qaeda or the Department of Homeland Security?”

FDA Destroys Incriminating Records On Aspartame article from

“In 2002, I spoke with Jerome Bressler, author of the damning FDA audit that exposed the corruption of the G. D. Searle Co., originator of aspartame. Bressler reported that rats killed by the poison were resurrected on paper, neoplasms filtered out and cancers caused by aspartame, were ignored and deleted from Searle’s records. Today this rat poison and cancer stimulator is sold as NutraSweet and Equal and is in Diet Coke and thousands of other foods and drinks.

Bressler had retired and I wanted to thank him for being so honest. But his reply was shocking. He said, “If you think that’s bad, when the FDA retyped my report they left out the worst 20%. They deleted my cover letter and there are two mice studies you need to see. Get those reports, they’re very important.” Doctors H. J. Roberts (Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, ) and Russell Blaylock (Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, ) also called Jerome Bressler and got the same information.”

White House recycles backup e-mail tapes article from Yahoo! News and The Associated Press

Nancy Pelosi, You Must Impeach! The Truth About the Wars Will Guarantee the Votes article from The Smirking Chimp:

“When people who honestly believe a lie learn the truth, they will either cease believing, or they will cease being honest.

Speaker Pelosi, President Bush could have achieved his goal of “regime change” in Iraq quickly and without the violence of war. Saddam Hussein offered, weeks before his country was invaded, to leave Iraq and go into exile. President Bush withheld this offer from public view-and refused it. Nor did the President need to invade Afghanistan to apprehend Osama bin Laden. On five different occasions, George Bush refused a standing offer from the Taliban to surrender Osama bin Laden-three times before 9/11 and twice thereafter, again without public disclosure.

No, the military engagements in Iraq and Afghanistan are not directed against terrorism. They are territorial in nature. Mr. Bush intended from his first days in office to invade the two countries: as early as late January, 2001, his Administration was developing the decisions and beginning the preparations for both military incursions. 9/11 was in the distant future, so the conflicts cannot be exercises in counter-terrorism, as the Bush Administration frequently and dishonestly insists. They are premeditated wars of unprovoked conquest and occupation.

Madam Speaker, if you know this, and if you continue refusing impeachment, then you are a criminal accomplice in violating the trust of the American people-and in violating both U.S. and international law.”

Unraveling the Myth of Al Qaida article and video from

The Activities at Mena article from

“If the people were to ever find out what we have done, we would be chased down the streets and lynched.”
— George Bush, cited in the June, 1992 Sarah McClendon Newsletter

Justices Back N.Y. Trial Judge System article from The New York Times:

“WASHINGTON – Sweeping aside complaints that New York State chooses its trial judges through an antiquated, patronage-tainted system that favors party cronies and gives voters no real say, the United States Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld the state’s unique system.

“Party conventions, with their attendant ‘smoke-filled rooms’ and domination by party leaders, have long been an accepted manner of selecting party candidates,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, in a decision that provided ample reminders that judges are politicians as well as somber, black-robed jurists.”

Chertoff Permanently Installs Hand-Picked DHS Staffers, ‘Overextending His Influence’ After 2008 article from Think Progress:

Now here’s a disturbing thought:

“Since its establishment in 2003, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has been plagued by incompetent political appointees. As late as last year, ABC News noted that DHS was still “a political dumping ground,” with 350 White House-appointed staffers (compared to just 64 at the Department of Veteran Affairs).

For the past five years, the Bush administration has refused to fire these cronies. Yet last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that all of a sudden, DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff had decided to replace many political appointees with career staffers. The reason for the White House’s sudden turnaround? According to Chertoff, they want to create a smooth transition for the next administration:

“We should not let ourselves drop the ball on the handoff,” Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said in a recent interview, adding that his department has assembled “something unusual from a historical standpoint” in its plans to hand over a fully-functioning homeland-security operation to the next administration.

Based on the administration’s track record, however, its real intentions may be less than magnanimous. The Wall Street Journal notes that the “transition planning may be perceived by the next administration as an effort by Homeland Security Chief Chertoff to overextend his influence.”

Punishing Thought Crime: Would New Bill Make YOU a Terrorist? article from AlterNet:

“Meet the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act.

According to Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., House Resolution 1955, otherwise known as the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007, is a much-needed piece of national security legislation subject to unnecessary paranoia and fear. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, the resolution, which Harman sponsored, is one step too close to an Orwellian nightmare, especially for the Democrats who concocted it.

The truth, as always, lies somewhere in between. But first, let’s back up and check the facts.”

John McCain’s real war record article from Salon News:

“On the campaign trail he touts his sharp criticism of Donald Rumsfeld and the Bush administration on Iraq. But a look at McCain’s record reveals a different war story.

Jan. 17, 2008 | WASHINGTON, DC — Early last year, John McCain seemed to lash his political fortune to the success or failure of the troop “surge” in Iraq. Backing the surge fit his carefully tended reputation as a maverick; his allies noted that McCain was bravely risking his political career to do what he believed was right. “I have just finished an election campaign,” Sen. Joe Lieberman said last January when he and McCain pushed the surge at a meeting at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “If rumors are correct, he may be starting one,” Lieberman said of McCain, standing at his side. “He is not taking the easy way out here. But he is taking the way that he believes is best for the safety of our children and grandchildren and the values and the way of life that America has come to represent.”

A year later, leaving aside the question of its long-term effects, the surge has had a tangible short-term security impact in Baghdad. And McCain, in his campaign for the Republican presidential nomination, isn’t going to let us forget that he knew better all along. “I’m proud to have been one of those who played a key role in bringing about one of the most important changes in recent years,” McCain trumpeted during the GOP debate in Manchester, N.H., on Jan. 6. “And that was the change in strategy from a failing strategy in Iraq pursued by Secretary Rumsfeld.” Two days later, McCain won the Granite State primary.”

Lawbreaking telecoms still conniving to obtain immunity from Congress article from Salon News:

It’s time for Congress to quit selling Americans out.

“Contrary to the completely erroneous claims by the Wall St. Journal Editorial Page that Senate Democrats intend to enact an 18-month extension of the Protect America Act without telecom immunity (false claims that produced some premature blogospheric declarations of victory last week), Reid has spent the last two weeks making abundantly clear that his intention is to bring to the Senate floor as early as next week the Bush-compliant Senate Intelligence Committee bill, and has further made clear that it’s his expectation that that bill — complete with warrantless eavesdropping powers and telecom immunity — will pass. Because the Protect America Act is scheduled to expire in early February, it will be necessary to extend it by 30 to 60 days, but that is seen by the Senate Democratic leadership only as a tool to enable them to work out a deal with the House to ensure that a bill acceptable to the President is sent to the White House promptly.

Manifestly, retroactive immunity is something available only to the largest, lobbyist-using corporations, and is not something that ordinary Americans would ever even get a hearing on. It’s as illustrative a case of core Beltway corruption as it gets. Yet as Clinton, Obama and Edwards parade around rhetorically proclaiming their “leadership abilities” and their willingness to fight vested interests in Washington and to defend the rule of law, they abdicate one opportunity after the next to demonstrate their authenticity. Taking a real stance against such a corrupt gift to the telecom industry — through real leadership rather than the obligatory, forced issuance of meaningless statements — seems like a rather compelling way for at least one of those candidates to distinguish their campaign.

As Matt Stoller recently documented, telecoms have become increasingly brazen about the fact that they essentially own multiple members of Congress. They began pouring money and other favors into the coffers of Jay Rockfeller at exactly the same time that they began cajoling him (successfully) to become the leading advocate for telecom immunity. Telecoms have on their payroll hordes of bipartisan loybbists and advisors working for immunity, including former Clinton officials such as Jamie Gorerlick.”

Institutionalized Spying on Americans: Homeland Security’s National Applications Office (NAO) article from The Intelligence Daily – Illuminating the connection:

“ brings together campaign contributions and how legislators vote, providing an unprecedented window into the connections between money and politics. We currently cover the California Legislature and U.S. Congress.”

The Op-Ed the New York Times didn’t run article from OpEdNews

It’s Not Just About Immunity article from Daily Kos:

“When the Senate reconvenes next week, legislation to amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) will be among the first issues we address. I am as determined as ever to use all procedural tools at my disposal, including a filibuster, to try to stop the FISA legislation if it doesn’t protect the privacy of law abiding Americans or if it includes immunity for telecom companies.  I am also deeply grateful for the energy this community has put behind stopping this assault on the rights and liberties of Americans – it gave a huge boost to our successful effort in December to stop a bad FISA bill being rammed through the Senate. But while we had some temporary success last month, we face an uphill battle to fix the bill, particularly since the Democratic leadership still seems intent on bringing the flawed Intelligence Committee bill to the floor, rather than the better version approved by the Judiciary Committee.

But immunity is only one of the very serious problems with the Intelligence Committee FISA bill. We all agree that when foreign terrorists are communicating with each other overseas, the U.S. government shouldn’t need a warrant to listen in. But both the so-called Protect America Act (PAA) – the law we passed last year – and the Intelligence Committee bill go far beyond addressing that issue. They grant unprecedented powers to the executive branch to engage in widespread surveillance involving Americans, with virtually no judicial involvement. There is a better alternative in the Senate, and that is the Judiciary Committee bill.  It is vastly preferable not only because it does not contain immunity, but also because it provides for meaningful, independent judicial oversight of the new wiretapping authorities, and more protections for the communications of Americans that get swept up in these broad new surveillance powers. Here are some of the serious problems with the Intelligence Committee bill:

* The PAA and the Intelligence Committee bill allow the government to acquire communications between foreigners and Americans inside the United States, without a court order and regardless of whether anyone involved in the communication is under any suspicion of wrongdoing. There is no requirement that the foreign targets of this surveillance be terrorists, spies or other types of criminals. The only requirements are that the foreigners are outside the country, and that the purpose is to obtain foreign intelligence information, a term that has an extremely broad definition.

No court reviews these targets individually; only the executive branch decides who fits these criteria. The result is that many law-abiding Americans in the U.S. who communicate with completely innocent people overseas will be swept up in this new form of surveillance, with virtually no judicial involvement.  Even the Administration’s illegal warrantless wiretapping program, as described when it was publicly confirmed in 2005, at least focused on particular suspected terrorists. Not even the Judiciary bill adequately addresses this very serious problem.”

How the CIA Created a Ruling, Corporate Overclass in America article from The New World Order News Blogspot

The American War Upon the World article from OpEdNews

Bush Surrogates Raise Nearly $250 Million to Smear Dem Nominee article from AlterNet:

“When looking ahead to November, one of the advantages Democrats enjoy over Republicans is financial — for the first time in modern political history, Dems are raising quite a bit more money than Republicans. The DCCC, for example, already has $31 million on hand for the cycle, while the NRCC has less than $3 million.

Great news, right? Well, yes, except “independent” right-wing entities are going to pick up the slack — and then some. Out in front will be our old friends at Freedom’s Watch.

When a group of former White House aides formed a political advocacy group called Freedom’s Watch last summer, its initial wave of ads featured battered Iraq war veterans pleading for support for President Bush’s “surge” of troops.

Last month, the theme changed dramatically as the same group splashed dark, grainy images of illegal immigrants across television screens in northern Ohio, attacking a Democratic candidate’s position on the divisive domestic issue.

Freedom’s Watch has loudly announced that there will be no limits to what it might do…. While initial reports suggested a budget of $200 million, people who have talked to the group in recent weeks say the figure is closer to $250 million, more than double the amount spent by the largest independent liberal groups in the 2004 election cycle.”

Is the Dem Congress Criminally Insane? article from OpEdNews

“This coming year will be a time when the damage Bush and Cheney have done so far will seem miniscule, compared to what they can and will do if allowed to continue running the US into the ground.

Today, to intervene, hoping to damp the expected crash that the rest of the world experienced yesterday, the Fed cut a key interest rate 3/4s of a point. We still see, an hour into the market day, the market down 350 points– with a massive rate cut. The Bush/Cheney administration is clueless and don’t have any answers. It’s not suprising, since they have made appointments based on loyalty, not competence.

In the SC debate, yesterday, the candidates agreed that Bush has been incredibly destructive.

Hillary said, “We will inherit a huge amount of damage from President Bush.” and Obama said, “When you look at Bush and Cheney and what they’ve done for us… They have given their party a very bad name.”

It is criminally insane for the congress to allow Bush and Cheney to continue, without holding impeachment hearings. The candidates, at least the Democratic candidates, should be challenged on impeachment at every opportunity. “If you know the damage Bush and Cheney are doing to the nation, why are you not supporting impeachment?”

Dirty Tricks Without Illusions article from The Washington Post

The Subprime Color Line article from AlterNet:

“Dig deep into the subprime mortgage crisis and you’ll find the basic story behind our new Gilded Age.”

There Is No “War on Terror” article from

Ailing GIs deployed to war zones article from The Denver Post

A recent article from The Denver Post reported on Fort Carson soldiers not medically fit for duty who were sent back to war zones to meet ‘deployable strength’ goals — taking some borderline soldiers who would otherwise have been left behind for continued treatment according to e-mails obtained by The Denver Post.

Will the Democratic presidential candidates adhere to their rhetoric? article from Salon News

It’s FISA Time article from Crooks and Liars:

“Game on—-It looks like the Republicans will be trying to force Harry Reid to capitulate on the FISA fight very soon. We need real leadership from the Democratic Party presidential candidates. Here’s Glenn Greenwald:

It will be increasingly difficult to listen to Edwards, Obama and Clinton tout their supreme leadership attributes and their commitment to “changing the way Washington works” if they choose to sit by, more or less mute, and allow such a blatant and corrupt evisceration of the rule of law — and such a vast and permanent expansion of the limitless surveillance state — to occur without a fight. Any one of them, or all three, has a unique opportunity to actually demonstrate with actions, rather than pretty speeches, their commitment to the principles they claim to espouse…

Jane invites John Edwards to the dance:

John Edwards is the perfect person to lead with this message. Such an action would illustrate his genuine commitment to change and fighting vested interests in Washington, and hopefully it will channel that intense anti-immunity passion toward his campaign. He won’t be able to participate in the filibuster himself, but by offering to leave the campaign trail and go back to DC with Clinton and Obama he’ll be able to show leadership in challenging all Democrats to put thoughts of personal gain aside and join together in the fight to save the constitution. (email [email protected])”

Coleen Rowley: Telecom Immunity: Covering Up Illegality by Secrecy and Fear article from The Huffington Post:

“Dick Cheney was at his best shilling for immunity for telecom companies today before the Heritage Foundation. His speech came one day before the Republican rubber stamp machine in the Senate attempts another push to give blanket immunity to the telecommunication companies suspected of engaging in illegal eavesdropping and surveillance of Americans. Although wiretapping is usually justified as a necessary tool in the “War on Terror”, there is good reason to doubt the official story and question the legality of the Bush administration’s practices.

Already a series of Bush administration lies on the subject has collapsed. First, there was President Bush’s repeated public statements back in 2004 that wiretapping occurs in the United States only pursuant to court order. NY Times writers who had found out otherwise were threatened and cajoled into silence for an entire year. When the government’s massive warrantless surveillance program was finally exposed in 2005, we were told the “terrorist surveillance program” had been instituted in response to the 9-11 attacks and the threat of terrorism. But a number of credible sources have since reported that the NSA’s domestic phone record program began 7 months before 9/11.”

Bill Moyers talks with David Cay Johnston article from

“Bill Moyers interviews NEW YORK TIMES investigative reporter and Pulitzer Prize-winner David Cay Johnston who says America’s system has been rigged to benefit the super-rich.

BILL MOYERS: Yeah, the theme of the book as I read it is that not that the rich are getting richer but that they’ve got the government rigging the rules to help them do it.

DAVID CAY JOHNSTON: That’s exactly right. And they’re doing it in a way that I think is very crucial for people to understand. They’re doing it by taking from those with less to give to those with more. So the other moral authority I cite in the book is the Bible, both the Old Testament and the new. And all the way through those two books you can read condemnation after condemnation of taking from the poor to benefit the rich. You will come to ruin, it says in the Old Testament, if you give to the rich and yet that’s what we’re doing. We gave $100 million dollars to Warren Buffett’s company last year, a gift from the taxpayers. We make gifts all over the place to rich people. And yet the way the news media write about it, people are often very unaware of this because we use complicated terms and meaningless language to the average reader so they don’t understand what’s happened.”

Consequences for ignoring congressional subpoenas: None article from Salon News:

“Back in July of last year — more than six months ago — the Senate and House Judiciary Committees were investigating the U.S. attorneys scandal and, as part of that investigation, they issued subpoenas to current Bush Chief of Staff Josh Bolton and former White House counsel Harriet Miers, “compelling” them to appear before the Committee to answer questions. While some Bush officials testified but cited “executive privilege” as a grounds for refusing to answer specific questions, both Miers and Bolton simply refused to show up at all — literally just ignored the subpoena as though it were an invitation.

Wow; those are tough words: “hastening a constitutional crisis.” “The White House must stop stonewalling.” “No one, including the president, is above the law.”

Since the White House announced to the world that it considered Congress’ subpoenas to be laughable and worthless, what has happened? Exactly what Miers and Bolton knew would happen if they ignored the subpoenas: absolutely nothing of any consequence. Both Committees voted to issue contempt citations to the two officials, but Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi — for months and months — have refused to bring the matter to the floor for a full vote, a requirement for a witness to be held in contempt.”

Found in Translation article from The American Consevative Magazine:

“FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds spills her secrets.”

Cheney Wants Surveillance Law Expanded article from The Associated Press

Ex-UN Weapons Inspector Ritter Asks If Bush, Cheney Planned Implosion Of WTC article and video from Prison Planet:

“In his usual form, former U.N. weapons inspector Scott Ritter told a packed crowd at the Oriental Theater in Denver to stop whining about corporate media and become their own intelligence operatives. We the people have the same resources and tools that intelligence networks rely heavily on; it’s called “Google” he said.

He asked, “Did Bush and Cheney Plan the demise of the building? Was this a terrorist attack by Al-Qaeda? Or was it something in between? Well frankly we don’t know.” How important is this to establishing justice? Mr. Ritter seems to think it is an “absolute requirement to know what happened on 9-11”

The Legacy of George W Bush’s Presidency article from Democratic Caucus:

A well done graph regarding the country he inherited and the country he’s leaving behind.

Bush’s “A” List of High Crimes and Misdemeanors article from The American Chronicle

Your Harry Reid-led Senate in action article from Salon News

Why the CIA is the World’s Number One Terrorist Organization article from ExistentialistCowboy Blogspot:

“The CIA. itself a ruthless, terrorist organization inspires terrorism in response. In some cases, notably the CIA and al Qaeda, the relationship between the CIA and terrorism is symbiotic. The CIA has perpetrated an “American Holocaust”, the deaths of some 6 million people from its inception to the year 1987. As Long as the CIA Exists, the US will never be safe from terrorism.

CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader because he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the environment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help,the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal: “We’ll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us.” The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy).
–Steve Kangas, A Timeline of CIA Atrocities”
(linked in the article)

Back to Bill’s Blog | Bill’s Links and More

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.