United States News Digest
Cheney Caught, Again, in Big Lie at Heritage Talk
Once again, Vice-President Dick Cheney crawled out from whatever rock he has been hiding under, to issue a tirade of lies that the war against Iraq was "the central front in the war against terror." Cheney spoke at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. on October 10.
Cheney said that 9/11 had called for "a shift in national security policy," since deterrence and containment no longer worked. Instead, Cheney said, "There is only one way to protect ourselves against catastrophic terrorist violence, and that is to destroy the terrorists before they can launch any further attacks against the United States."
Cheney lied that matters were going swimmingly in Afghanistan, where the Karzai government was now "fully joined in the war on terror." He lied that Saddam Hussein, because of his "reckless and sudden aggression," had been supporting Abu Nidal, Palestinian suicide bombers, and al-Qaeda: "He also had established a relationship with al-Qaeda, providing training to al-Qaeda members in the areas of poisons, gases, making conventional bombs." As a result, Cheney said: "...The ultimate nightmare, could bring devastation to our country on a scale we have never experienced. Instead of losing thousands of lives, we might lose tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of lives in a single day of war."
Cheney judoed CIA analyst David Kay's mealy-mouthed report, to say that he was certain WMD would be found amongst the 100 weapons depots, "some of which cover areas larger than 50 square miles." He ticked off the laundry list of WMD "massive breach[es]" of UN Resolution 1441, from a purported prison where biological warfare agents were tested, to Iraq seeking Ballistic Missile technology for a 1,300-kilometer-range missile from North Korea.
He said that in the future, if the President determines that U.S. national security interests demand it, then the U.S. will go with what allies it needs against what enemies it perceives, because having a checkmate from allies "amounts to a policy of doing nothing." He exaggerated that 50 allies were aiding the U.S. in Iraq, and 70 in Afghanistan. He claimed that the U.S. was training the police, army, governing council, ministers, and so forth for self-rule in Iraq, but gave no dates. "Today, because we acted, Iraq stands to be a force for good in the Middle East," Cheney said.
He concluded with all praise to Bush (for heeding his advice?): "The current debate over America's national security policy is the most consequential since the early days of the Cold War and the emergence of a bipartisan commitment to face the evils of communism. All of us now look back with respect and gratitude on the great decisions that set America on the path to victory in the Cold War and kept us on that path through nine Presidencies. I believe that one day, scholars and historians will look back on our time and pay tribute to the 43rd President, who has both called upon and exemplified the courage and perseverance of the American people."
Cheney's performance at the Heritage Foundation capped a several day public relations drive to sell the ongoing Iraq occupation to the American public, which also included a speech by National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice in Chicago, and several appearances by President Bush in New England. However, the Cheney speech was so hardline that the Washington Post reported, the next day, that it would likely cause more backlash than support for the Administration's effort to win public backing for an added $87 billion in expenditures.
Washington Post Notes LaRouche Matching Funds
In her Oct. 12, Sunday Politics column, published in the Washington Post, Dana Milbank wrote the following: "FEC Distributes Matches: It's a two-man race now: Dean vs. LaRouche. The Federal Election Commission announced last week that perennial presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche became the only Democrat other than Dean to request and receive eligibility for federal matching funds. LaRouche and Dean achieved this feat by raising $5,000 each from 20 states in amounts no higher than $250 from any person." The item appeared below a headline grabbing piece exposing AIPAC's drift towards the Republican Party, headlined "In Drive to Aid Israel, Lobby May Be Shifting Out of Neutral."
Timeline of Wilson Leaks Points To Cheney
The Washington Post, on Sunday, Oct. 12, provided new details about the FBI's ongoing investigation into the source of the Bush Administration leak about Ambassador Joe Wilson's wife, CIA clandestine officer Valerie Plame. According to the Post, FBI investigators are probing the actions of the Bush Administration in the month leading up to the July 14 Robert Novak column, which "outed" Plame as a CIA agent. The FBI is seeking to determine how Plame's name first came up inside the Bush Administration, not just to identify the leakers. As far back as June 2003, Bush Administration officials were running damage control on the Joe Wilson mission to Niger, which disproved stories that Iraq was obtaining yellow-cake uranium from the African country. The Post reported that one key question in the FBI probe is when and how White House officials and "members of the Vice President's staff" found out about Plame's CIA employment.
The Post story noted that the first public mention of the Wilson mission in Feb. 2002 to Niger was a Nicholas Kristof column in the May 6, 2003 New York Times, which did not mention Wilson's name, but did give an accurate account of his trip and his findings. The Kristof column highlighted the role of Vice President Cheney in seeking the CIA probe of reports of the Iraq-Niger yellowcake deals. On June 12, the Washington Post again reported on the Wilson Niger missionin more detail, but still without mentioning his name. According to the Oct. 12 Post report, by this time, the White House knew fully about Wilson's mission and launched an effort to downplay its significance, including its first criticisms of Wilson. At this time, Wilson told reporters, he personally escalated the pressure on the White House by sending a message to Condi Rice, through mutual contacts, warning that her strong statements in a "Meet the Press" TV interview on June 8, denying that senior Administration officials knew about the Wilson mission, were wrong. Rice communicated back to Wilson that she was "not interested and he should publish his story in his own name if he wanted to attract attention," the Post reported Oct. 12.
On July 6, Wilson did go public, with his New York Times oped, and with his own appearance, the same day, on "Meet the Press." The very next day, the White House was forced to issue a statement, admitting that President Bush had been wrong to include the now famous 16-words in his State of the Union speech, citing British evidence of Iraq seeking uranium in Africa. Later the same week, CIA Director George Tenet "fell on the sword," and took credit for the failure to expunge the 16 words from the Bush speech. Also, two "top White House officials disclosed Plame's identity to at least six Washington journalists, an Administration official told the Post for an article published Sept. 28." The same unnamed administration official later confirmed to the Post that the leaking of Plame's CIA identity was "part of their broader case against Wilson." The source told the Post, "It was unsolicited. They were pushing back. They used everything they had."
The Post article also reported that on July 12two days before the Novak column named Plamean Administration official told a Post reporter that the White House had ignored the Wilson trip because it was "set up as a boondoggle by his wife." On July 17, Time magazine's web site noted that "some government officials" had named Plame as a CIA agent. Shortly after Novak's column was published, several other high-profile reporters told Wilson that they had been called by White House officials, including NBC News reporter (and wife of Alan Greenspan) Andrea Mitchell. On July 21, Wilson received a call from Chris Matthews, according to Newsweek, in which the MSNBC host told Wilson that he had just gotten off the phone with Karl Rove, who had told him that Wilson's wife was "fair game."
EIR Sources Add Further Evidence of Cheney Role in Leaks
A well-placed U.S. intelligence source has told EIR that the timeline of attacks on Ambassador Joe Wilson and his wife date back at least to March 2003, within days of IAEA chief Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei's testimony before the UN Security Council, exposing the Niger government documents, purporting Iraqi efforts to purchase yellowcake, as forgeries. According to the source, at that time, Vice President Cheney and top aides began probing Ambassador Wilson and his family, in a damage control effortfour months prior to Wilson's July 6 New York Times op-ed. If this report proves accurate, it further shows that Cheney and his top aides were aware of the Joe Wilson mission and his findings prior to the May 6, 2003, Kristof piece in the New York Timesand shows that the Veep and his aides have been lying about their involvement. Other top national security specialists have emphasized to EIR that they are convinced that Cheney's chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, is at the center of the "Leakgate" scandal, and that members of the Defense Policy Board may also be implicated in the leaking.
Four Senators Slam Administration Leak Probe
The Washington Post reported on Oct. 10 that Democratic Minority Leader Thomas A. Daschle (D-SD), along with Democratic Senators Joseph R. Biden, Jr., (Del.), Carl M. Levin (Mich.), and Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.), sent a letter to President George W. Bush pointing to "five missteps" in the investigation of the blown cover of CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson, wife of Amb. Joseph Wilson.
The objections lead with the decision of White House counsel Alberto R. Gonzolez to screen documents of White House employees submitted in response to the Department of Justice request, and his possible claim of "Executive Privilege" to withhold some. They cite this as one reason why a special counsel must be named.
The letter states that: "Already, just fourteen days into the investigation, there have been at least five serious missteps. ... We are at risk of seeing this investigation so compromised that those responsible for this national security breach will never be identified and prosecuted."
Other "missteps" include: 1) The Department of Justice began its investigation on Sept. 26, but did not ask the White House to order employees to preserve relevant evidence until Sept. 29; 2) The Justice Department did not ask the Pentagon and State Department to preserve possible evidence until late on Oct. 1, after news reports that such a request was coming; 3) White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan has said that he determined that three senior officials who were the subject of speculation in news accounts were not involved in leaking classified information, and the Senators believe that this displayed rank incompetence; and, 4) Attorney General Ashcroft remains responsible for the probe despite his close political and personal relationships with Bush and his top aides.
Low Combat Fatality Rate Masks Iraq Fiasco
"Visiting the Walter Reed Army Medical Center... [is like visiting] a Civil War hospital." Lawrence Kaplan writes in the Oct. 30 datelined issue of The New Republic, that although Walter Reed Army Medical Center is located only a few miles north "of the think tanks, Government offices, and, yes, magazines that pressed for war in Iraq," only President George W. Bush, of all those who did so, has twice visited the " mangled 19-, 20-, and 21-year-olds on whom they rely to accomplish America's aims abroad." Alone among the "mainstream press," The New York Times has done but one fictionalized account of the people who must now learn to live without arms and legs.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has tried to hide this tragedy by flying the wounded in, in C-17s and C-141 aircraft at night to Andrews Air Force Base, "under cover of darkness," where there are no TV lights to guide the wounded to their ambulances. Kaplan notes, "Pentagon officials have rebuked public affairs officers who release casualty figures, and until recently, U.S. Central Command did not regularly publicize the injured tally either." Although 200 Americans have been killed, a rough estimate, which is a military guesstimate, is that "1,600 Americans have been wounded, more than 1,300 of them in combat." Medical trauma treatment has tended to mask this development, because, where, during World War II, one-in-three casualties survived, today it is one-in-eight.
Kaplan concludes: "The numbers tell a truth about the situation on the ground in Iraq or at least about the Sunni triangle where most of them originate. Every day, guerrillas wound an average of nearly ten Americans, many of them grievously. And these are just the ambushes that find their mark. Soldiers back from Iraq tell of coming under fire routinely, and, in recent weeks, about 20 separate attacks on American forces have been reported every day. As a result, the sheer number of wounded soldiers exceeds anything Americans have seen since Vietnam."
|