Tuesday, June 14, 2005

Since the last time I wrote...

Newsweek's article regarding the desecration of the Koran at Quantanamo has been 'semi-acknowledged' by the Bush Administration. Nothing so bad as flushing it down the toilet, of course, but other 'minor' acts of disrespect have admittedly occurred. Such as, a soldier urinating through a vent onto a prisoner holding the Koran. But really, can that be considered an act of desecration? Not unless the Koran itself was the target and not the prisoner. If the prisoner was the soldier's intended target, then it's deemed just another stealthy act of interrogation.

Typically, the fair and balanced reporting of our national media has skimmed over the irony of the Administration's late Friday night admission, leaving us to wonder once again, "what's the true story here?" Or maybe not. The citizens of this country do not seem consumed with concern for the Koran, or the Quantanamo prisoners, Muslims at large and presumably more dangerous than ever, or even themselves for that matter, given the direction this country has turned.

But all is well in the world: Michael Jackson was acquitted on all charges of molestation and serving alcohol to a minor. The King of Pop is now plopped on his bed recovery from this ordeal, presumably alone. Or maybe with a pet monkey --- but no more boys under the age of 18; Attorney Mesereau assured us of that.

Barely a whisper was lip synched here in the U.S.A. in response to the London Time's May 1st disclosure of what has been called the "Downing Street Memo," now infamous throughout Europe. This memo, so-called, is actually a document containing the minutes of a meeting of Prime Minister Blair's top advisers in which it is very clear that plans to remove Saddam were in the making. That is to say, being fabricated. The memo in part states:

"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."

The memo is dated July 23 2002, eight months before the U.S.-led attack on Iraq.

[The full memo can be read at this site:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html]

Today another memo has been unearthed, again by a London Times' reporter. The 'introduction' to that memo, also dated July 23, 2002, states:

"1. The US Government's military planning for action against Iraq is proceeding apace. But, as yet, it lacks a political framework. In particular, little thought has been given to creating the political conditions for military action, or the aftermath and how to shape it. "

The full memo can be read at:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-1648758_1,00.html

The Washington Post ran with this new disclosure on its front page today. No doubt the outpouring of angry Americans tired of the media self-censoring itself as it kowtows to the Bush Administration, has made an impression. People, including myself, have been inundating the network and cable news channels demanding coverage on this topic, with minimal success to date. We have gone to the websites and signed the petitions. (If you haven't yet, you still can:
http://www.johnconyers.com/; http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/; http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/.)

It's this type of grassroots effort that can bring about change for the better.

While the established national media failed to pursue this explosive issue, the internet, with its bloggers and investigators, succeeded in keeping the Downing Street Memo alive here in the U.S., despite the efforts of George and his press agent to downplay and kill it. It just may be the smoking gun that will ultimately bring this Administration to its creaky knees. Maybe while there, George will learn the true purpose for prayer: To beg forgiveness. (Now THAT would be truly be a miracle and make believers out of all of us, no?)

Long before George W. Bush's vulgar presence in the White House, the Project for a New American Century sent then President Clinton a letter stating that US policy toward Iraq was not succeeding and that he needed to form a new strategy that would no doubt include US military involvement in the removal of Saddam's regime. That letter, dated in January of 1998, is signed by Bush Administration neocons Elliott Abrams, John Bolton, Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz, among others. Even William J. Bennett got his 'Hancock' onto it. [See
http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm]

If you've never read the Project for a New American Century's Statement of Principles, it is definitely worth the five minutes it'll take. [
http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm ]

That document, signed by our very own Vice President Cheney, along with all the neocons listed above plus George's brother Jeb (but surprisingly, not George himself. Guess he was off bicycling that day.) and dated June 3, 1997, clearly sets out the Bush administration's foreign policy. While nothing specific is stated regarding an attack on Iraq, the ideology gleaned between the lines clearly supports such tactics.