Extra Extra Read all about it!

Libby Trial Exposes Neocon Shadow Government


Day by day, witness by witness, exhibit by exhibit, Patrick Fitzgerald, the prosecutor in the trial of Dick Cheney’s man, I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, is accomplishing what no one else in Washington has been able to: He has impeached the Presidency of George W. Bush.

Of course, it’s an unofficial impeachment, but it will also, through its documentation, be inerasable. The trial record...testimony, exhibits, the lot...will be there, in one place, for investigators, scholars, reporters and Congress to pore over. It goes far beyond the charges against Mr. Libby. It is, instead, a road map to the abuses of power that Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney and their shadow government of neoconservatives have committed as the neocons carried out what they had been planning for years: an invasion of Iraq,and other military excursions,for the purpose of expanding American dominion.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wow...I didn't know about this newspaper. It is very refreshing to see a comprehensive report on a subject that has been on many peoples minds since 911. In this artical they bring up references to the PNAC, which many of us have been studying and contains damning evidence that this whole thing with Afghanistan and Iraq was planned even before George W Bush went into office. Dubya appointed members of the PNAC into most of the high positions of this devious administration, and their names are shown on documents that are on the PNAC web site (Project For The New American Century).

~LINK~

~PNAC~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Run Al Run~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
.
.
.

Stock market dropped 500 points today

Update




US STOCKS-Stocks sink on fears about China and growth

Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:30pm ET


By Ellis Mnyandu

NEW YORK, Feb 27 (Reuters) - U.S. stocks tumbled on Tuesday, driving the Dow Jones industrial average down in its worst slide since the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, as a sell-off in China's stock market raised concerns that equity valuations may be too high.

A U.S. government report showing a bigger-than-expected drop in January's new orders for U.S.-made durable goods added to investors' concerns about the outlook for economic growth and corporate profits. Those worries added more fuel to the sell-off and helped contribute to a loss of about $600 billion in market value for the day.

The New York Stock Exchange's closing bell was greeted with a chorus of "boos" from the trading floor. A surge in trading volume triggered a technical glitch in late afternoon, contributing to an abrupt swing in the Dow average, which briefly fell 500 points. A Dow Jones Indexes spokeswoman said the glitch did not affect stock prices.

Here's some interesting things that went on in different parts of the world. Some countries like Venesuela and Russia had signifigent gains.

WORLD INDEXES


++++++++++++++++++++++++++

GENERAL IDX Venezuela 51,021.09 +1,404.84 +2.83%

MIB 30 Italy 42,821.00 +364.00 +0.86%

BRSP BOVESPA IDX Brazil 46,207.40 +191.61 +0.42%

WEIGHTED Taiwan 7,900.20 +90.75 +1.16%

MUMBAI BSE SENSEX India 13,649.52 +16.99 +0.12%


While others like the USA, Japan, and Hongkong had signifigent losses.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

NIKKEI 225 Japan 17,464.73 -655.19 -3.62%

HANG SENG Hong Kong 19,512.41 -635.46 -3.10%

DOW JONES IND. USA 12,216.24 -416.02 -3.29%

DAX 30 Germany 6,819.65 -207.94 -2.96%

I don't know what all this means, but it looks like Venesuela is making out OK.
What if they cash in their chips in the morning? Can they do that? $$$

Cheney seems pleased with foreign troop withdrawal

The Strange World of Dick Cheney


First published 2007-02-23


While insisting on the "surge" of thousands more American troops into Iraq, vice president Cheney sounds gratefully satisfied that other members of the "coalition of the willing" - the Japanese, the Dutch, the British - continue to depart from Iraq., says John Nichols.



Vice president Dick Cheney, keeping as far from federal prosecutors as possible these days, arrived in Japan Wednesday to officially thank that country for supporting the Bush-Cheney administration's invasion and occupation of Iraq.


What made the trip even more comic than Cheney's usual campaigning on behalf of the war - that he, more than any other member of the administration, wanted, plotted and defends with a disregard not just for the laws of the land but for reality - was the fact that he was thanking an ally that is not exactly in the alliance.


Japan was a part of the original "coalition of the willing" - more precisely referred to as the "coalition of the coerced" – that signed on for the quagmire run.


But Japan pulled its troops out of Iraq last year.


The Japanese still provide a minimal number of airlifts in support of US operations in the Middle East, but even that mission is set to end in July.


So Cheney was thanking a country that is essentially, and quite happily, out of the coalition.


If the Japan Appreciation Day mission was bizarre, the vice president's speech in a hangar bay at the Yokosuka Naval Base near Tokyo was downright delusional. "The American people will not support a policy of retreat," Cheney chirped. "We want to complete the mission, we want to get it done right, and then we want to come home, with honor."


Exactly who are these "American people" the vice president is communing with?


Not the overwhelming majority of Americans who tell pollsters they want the United States to exit Iraq.


Not the clear majority of Americans who voted last November for a Democratic Congress charged with the task of bringing the troops home.


And not the American president who cheerfully accepted the decision of British prime Minister Tony Blair to substantially reduce that country's boots on the ground in Iraq – as well as the decision of the Danes to withdraw from the endeavor.


When the Danish prime minister called this week to inform Bush that the country's 460 troops would be leaving Iraq, the president had no objection to the decision to cut and run. According to Denmark's Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Bush expressed "both understanding and satisfaction that the situation in Iraq makes it possible for Denmark and Britain to reduce their numbers of troops."


If this war gets much more "satisfying," the United States will be fighting it alone.


But don't expect to hear Bush or Cheney complaining about the inability of the Brits, the Danes, the Japanese or the Tongans to understand the importance of Iraq to the "war on terror." That silly spin is reserved for domestic consumption. It's a political hammer used to attack Democrats who fail to rubberstamp the administration's misguided strategies - not a serious concern on the part of the administration.


For all the "stay-the-course" rhetoric from Bush and Cheney, this administration has been more than willing to accept the retreats of allies from Iraq. Why? Because the president and vice president don't want Americans to pay attention to the fact that the "coalition of the willing" has crumbled.


In addition to Japan - which, like most countries, had a largely symbolic presence in the Middle East - the following countries have joined the coalition of the unwilling to remain in Iraq: the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, the philippines, portugal, Nicaragua, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Slovakia, Thailand, Tonga and the Ukraine.


Along with Denmark's exiting troops, Lithuania's contingent will likely leave this summer. Armenia's 46 troops are expected to be out at year end, as are poland's 900. And, while Moldova is technically still in the coalition, its 11 bomb-defusing experts quietly exited Iraq last December and have yet to be replaced.


Aside from Great Britain, which is dramatically downsizing its presence, only Australia - where prime Minister John Howard appears to be channeling Cheney - and South Korea now have more than 1,000 troops stationed in Iraq. And South Korea, which will extract 1,100 of its troops this spring, may not be around for much longer; the country's parliament has called for total withdrawal by December 31.


According to the www.globalsecurity.org website, which tracks military involvement in Iraq, Kazakhstan, with 29 troops, remains committed to the mission, as does Macedonia, with 33 troops; Estonia, with 34 troops; Bosnia and Herzegovina, with 37 troops and another ten countries, with between 100 and 865 troops each.


Here's a sobering fact to ponder: Add together all the troops from all the foreign countries that are still in Iraq as committed members of the "coalition of the willing" and you will get a figure that is substantially lower than the 21,500 US troops that are now surging into the country on president Bush's orders.


But, despite the fact that the real surge is the one taking US allies out of Iraq, Cheney will keep preaching about America's refusal to accept retreat - even as he continues to thank countries, like Japan, that have had the wisdom to abandon a sorely misguided mission.



John Nichols is the Washington correspondent for The Nation magazine.

UPDATE: Whitehouse alters historical "60 Minutes" video of Bush & Scott Pelley at Camp David

(CBS) On Jan. 12, 2007, two days after President George W. Bush told the country that he would send 21,000 more troops into Iraq, the president sat down with 60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley for a candid conversation. The two met in Camp David's Laurel Cabin, where, in 2001, the president and his cabinet debated plans for the invasion of Afghanistan and thus launched the war on terror.



I did a post on this on Jan. 15, 2007, and later noticed that the video had been altered, so later did another post to try to explain this. Since that time the video on the original post does not match at all, allthough the text version has not been altered. I suppose that most people will watch the video and not bother with the text version, or just not notice the difference, but on the original video Bush mentioned 911, so that portion was deleted from the video...kinda like declassification?...

Near the end of the video these are the parts that were deleted...

And I gotta keep explaining, one, the consequences of failure, that failure in Iraq will affect the security of the people here in the United States. And secondly, that we can succeed. And the best way to succeed at this point in time is to increase troops in Baghdad to stop the sectarian violence so that a political process, an economic process so that the will of the 12 million people that voted in Iraq can be realized.


And I've just gotta continue to take my message to the people and to explain to them this is a well-thought-out decision that is in the interests of the today's generation of Americans and tomorrow's generation of Americans. What happens in the Middle East matters to the security of this country. We learned that lesson on September the 11th. The stakes are very high, and we have got not only to stay engaged diplomatically, but we've gotta succeed in chasing down terrorists as well as helping young democracies survive. What's interesting is that you got a young democracy in Lebanon being challenged. I believe there ought to be a Palestinian democracy. It is being challenged by militants. A young democracy in Afghanistan and a young democracy in Iraq, all being challenged by radicals and extremists. And they may seem like disparate elements, but they share the same vision and same philosophy, and they have the same desire to inflict damage, particularly on the United States of America. I think it's interesting that in the midst of all the troubles, that there are people who are actively fighting a form of government which is beneficial to people, and that's democracy.

They were deleted out of this paragraph at the end of the video...

BUSH: I'm gonna have to keep explaining. That's why I'm doing this interview with you. And I gotta keep explaining, one, the consequences of failure, that failure in Iraq will affect the security of the people here in the United States. And secondly, that we can succeed. And the best way to succeed at this point in time is to increase troops in Baghdad to stop the sectarian violence so that a political process, an economic process . . . so that the will of the 12 million people that voted in Iraq can be realized. Scott, sometimes you're the commander-in-chief, sometimes you're the educator-in-chief, and a lot of times you're both when it comes to war. And I've just gotta continue to take my message to the people and to explain to them this is a well-thought-out decision that is in the interests of the today's generation of Americans and tomorrow's generation of Americans. What happens in the Middle East matters to the security of this country. We learned that lesson on September the 11th. The stakes are very high, and we have got not only to stay engaged diplomatically, but we've gotta succeed in chasing down terrorists as well as helping young democracies survive. What's interesting is that you got a young democracy in Lebanon being challenged. I believe there ought to be a Palestinian democracy. It is being challenged by militants. A young democracy in Afghanistan and a young democracy in Iraq, all being challenged by radicals and extremists. And they may seem like disparate elements, but they share the same vision and same philosophy, and they have the same desire to inflict damage, particularly on the United States of America. I think it's interesting that in the midst of all the troubles, that there are people who are actively fighting a form of government which is beneficial to people, and that's democracy. We are in an ideological struggle, and it's a really classic ideological struggle, and Iraq is part of it. And it's very important for me to not only continue to explain why I believe we can be successful in Iraq but explain to people that what happens in the Middle East will affect the future of this country.

Which became this on the video...

BUSH: I'm gonna have to keep explaining. That's why I'm doing this interview with you. Scott, sometimes you're the commander-in-chief, sometimes you're the educator-in-chief, and a lot of times you're both when it comes to war. We are in an ideological struggle, and it's a really classic ideological struggle, and Iraq is part of it. And it's very important for me to not only continue to explain why I believe we can be successful in Iraq but explain to people that what happens in the Middle East will affect the future of this country.

This is the video as it exists now. I couldn't find an unaltered version...

Pres. Bush Candid About Iraq

Scott Pelley interviews President Bush after he delivered a major speech to the nation on his new Iraq strategy. Bush traveled from the White House to Fort Benning and to Camp David,

~VIDEO~

Brzezinski predicts provoking war with Iran.

"Make no mistake about it, I understand how tough it is, sir. I talk to families who die." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Dec. 7, 2006

~VIDEO~


From the Democratic Underground blog

Brzezinski's Damning Indictment

"Historic, Strategic and Moral Calamity"
Brzezinski's Damning Indictment
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

Most Americans are probably unaware of former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski's damning indictment of the Bush Regime in his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 1, 2007, as the United States no longer has a media--only a government propaganda ministry.

Brzezinski damned the Bush Regime's war in Iraq as "a historic, strategic, and moral calamity." Brzezinski damned the war as "driven by Manichean impulses and imperial hubris." He damned the war for "intensifying regional instability" and for "undermining America's global legitimacy."

Finally, a voice with weight speaks. Brzezinski is a real intellect, a real expert, unlike the political hacks who have followed him in the office.

Brzezinski told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that "the final destination on this downhill track is likely to be a head-on conflict with Iran and with much of the world of Islam." Brzezinski predicts "some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a 'defensive' U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan."

Brzezinski predicts provoking war with Iran.

~VIDEO~
.
.
.

Sam Donaldson KO's Dubya

Donaldson, retired and in his 70's told Bush off like many of the main stream media can only wish to do as they cower in the shadow of corporate controlled government.
On August 2nd, 2006, during what would be the last White House Press conference in the briefing room before it underwent major renovations, Sam Donaldson shouted, "Mr. President, should Mel Gibson be forgiven" – referencing reports of the actor/producer's alleged anti-Semitic remarks. Mr. Bush laughed and looked up to see who had asked the question. Bush joked, "Is that Sam Donaldson? Forget it...you're a has been! We don't have to answer has beens' questions." To which the famously outspoken and aggressive reporter retorted: "Better to have been a has-been than a never was Mr. President!"

Iran talks should include Ayatollah Ali Khamenei

It's high time to talk to Iran about nuclear enrichment.
This stand off has been going on for a long time, and why? The Bush administration wants Iran to suspend enrichment as a precondition.

The Bush administration has urged Iran to stop uranium work and begin negotiations with the United States and five other countries: Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. Iran has said it wants to talk but will not suspend enrichment as a precondition.

It sure looks like Iran want's to negotiate, but obviously would like to talk to all interested parties. According to the main stream media Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a wise ass. His latest proposition, that he would stop nuclear enrichment, if everybody else does, is of course ridiculouse, but I'm sure it was meant to be, and was aimed at a 12 year old intellect. Like...All the nuclear reacters on the planet must eventually shut down...Mahmoud is almost as ridiculouse as George W Bush, all though he seems pretty intelligent, and probably actually earned his engineering degree.

At any rate we should consider that he is not the sole leader of Iran, and hopefully doesn't have the military, industrial,corporate, media, etc. control that Bush does. Ahmadinejad is the president of the country. but the Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has the final say on any issue including Uranium enrichment.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued a fatwa saying the production, stockpiling and use of nuclear weapons was forbidden under Islam. The fatwa was cited in an official statement by the Iranian government at an August 2005 meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna.

So...when we decide to get serious about negotiations...?
What in the hell am I saying? This is seriously serious and involves the wellfare of everybody on planet Earth.
Isn't it the Ayatollah that should be included in these talks, as well as members of other countries, rather than the chosen few?

The sanctions on Iran were negotiated on 23 December 23, 2006, and gave 60 days to comply, which I believe comes to Feb. 21, 2007, which means that this sanction is finished,
so...?


RE: Sanctions

23 December 2006


SECURITY COUNCIL IMPOSES SANCTIONS ON IRAN FOR FAILURE TO HALT

URANIUM ENRICHMENT, UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTING RESOLUTION 1737 (2006)

Measures Will Be Lifted if Iran Suspends Suspect Activities;

Report Due from Atomic Energy Agency on Compliance within 60 Days
31 July

Determined to give effect to its unmet demand that Iran suspend all uranium enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, the Security Council today imposed sanctions on that country, blocking the import or export of sensitive nuclear materiel and equipment and freezing the financial assets of persons or entities supporting its proliferation sensitive nuclear activities or the development of nuclear-weapon delivery systems.

Unanimously adopting resolution 1737 (2006) under Article 41 of the Charter’s Chapter VII, the Council decided that Iran should, without further delay, suspend the following proliferation sensitive nuclear activities: all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development; and work on all heavy-water related projects, including the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water. The halt to those activities would be verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

It didn't happen, just like everything else that the Bush administration is involved in. It has been evident and is becoming more and more evident that Bush & Co. can't keep pushing the agenda that they have pursued since the day George W Bush came into office. They think that this great country is theirs rule and that the agenda is to take control of the whole Middle East. Israel not included because they are part of it, and are joined at the hip with the present Neoconservative administration of the US.

Israel is a very big player in this whole thing yet they are not even a member of the UN, let alone a member of the council. How in the world can there be any negotiation with Iran without Israel being present? Can the rest of the world let the 3rd. largest nuclear power set back while they use the US as a buffer between them and Iran? I'm not a politician or a diplomat, but I am way over being 12 years old, and I for one say that it is way past time for a serious talk about nuclear sanctions on Iran and that these sanctions should be considered in regard to the needs of all countries.

US intelligence on Iran proves 'unfounded'


Julian Borger, Vienna
February 24, 2007

MUCH of the intelligence on Iran's nuclear facilities provided to UN inspectors by American spy agencies has turned out to be unfounded, according to diplomatic sources in Vienna.

The claims come as the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, plus Germany, prepare to draft a second sanctions resolution on Iran.

They are reminiscent of the intelligence fiasco surrounding the Iraq war and coincide with a sharp increase in international tension as the International Atomic Energy Agency reported yesterday that Iran was defying a Security Council ultimatum to freeze its nuclear program.

The report sets the stage for debate on the imposition of stricter sanctions on Iran and raises the possibility that the US might resort

Voices from the past~Patrick J. Fitzgerald

We can't hear anything that was said at the trial, but we can hear what Patrick J. Fitzgerald said when he revealed the Indictement charges brought by the federal grand jury in August 2005, thanks to Talk Radio News Service




Fitzgerald reveals the indictment charges brought by a federal grand jury charged that Libby gave misleading information to the grand jury, allegedly lying about information he discussed with three news reporters. It alleged that he committed perjury before the grand jury in March 2004 and that he also lied to FBI agents investigating the case. (9:58)
Friday, October 28, 2005

Part 1



Fitzgerald illustrates how Libby's initial statement to the FBI regarding his knowledge of Valerie Plame's CIA status was false, and questions Libby's motivation to leak Plame's top secret information. (10:49)
Friday, October 28, 2005

Part 2

Parts 1 through 6 are on... Talk Radio News Service

Tony Blaire's disastrous troop withdrawal?

Britain to Cut 1,600 Troops in Iraq, Blair Says


By ALAN COWELL
Published: February 21, 2007

LONDON, Feb. 21 — In sharp contrast to the American troop buildup in Baghdad, Prime Minister Tony Blair announced today that Britain will withdraw up to 1,600 of its roughly 7,100 British troops in southern Iraq in the next few months


But a month ago Tony said "setting an "arbitrary timetable would send a disastrous signal to Iraq"

Last Updated: Wednesday, 24 January 2007, 17:12 GMT

Campbell interview

Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell has called for UK troops to leave Iraq by the end of October.
Sir Menzies says a phased withdrawal of British forces should start in May.

But at prime minister's questions Tony Blair dismissed the call, saying that setting an "arbitrary timetable" would send a "disastrous signal" to Iraq



But what about the Australian troops?

PM plays down British troop withdrawal

Wednesday, 21 February , 2007 18:14:00

Reporter: Alexandra Kirk

MARK COLVIN: And despite the confidence of the British newspapers in reporting the phased withdrawal, the pull out, whatever you want to call it, here the Federal Government has been quick to insist that Britain will not be withdrawing from Iraq.

The Government says Britain's reduction of troop numbers has no implications for Australian forces in the south of the country.

The Prime Minister says Australia's contingent of 550 soldiers cannot be reduced, because that would cause it to fall below a critical mass.

And now for something completely different

EXCLUSIVE: Cheney Says British Troop Withdrawal Is Positive Sign


Feb. 21, 2007 — British Prime Minister Tony Blair's announcement that British troops will begin withdrawing from Iraq would appear to be bad news for the Bush administration.

But in an exclusive interview with ABC News, Vice President Dick Cheney said the move was actually good news and a sign of progress in Iraq.

"Well, I look at it and see it is actually an affirmation that there are parts of Iraq where things are going pretty well," Cheney told ABC News' Jonathan Karl.

"In fact, I talked to a friend just the other day who had driven to Baghdad down to Basra, seven hours, found the situation dramatically improved from a year or so ago, sort of validated the British view they had made progress in southern Iraq and that they can therefore reduce their force levels," Cheney said.

ABC News interviewed the vice president in Tokyo, where he told troops aboard the USS Kitty Hawk that the United States would not withdraw until the job was done.

"I want you to know that the American people will not support a policy of retreat," Cheney told the soldiers.


Will Australia Withdraw Troops Next?

Cheney had harsh words for Democratic leaders, including Pennsylvania Rep. Jack Murtha, who says he wants to stop the surge of more U.S. troops into Iraq.

"I think he's dead wrong. I think if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we'll do is validate the al Qaeda strategy," Cheney said.

"The al Qaeda strategy is to break the will of the American people. In fact, knowing they can't win in a stand-up fight, try to convince us to throw in the towel and come home and then they win because we quit."

Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain recently lashed out at Cheney and his friend, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. McCain said that Rumsfeld was probably the worst secretary of defense in U.S. history.

Today, Cheney fired back.

"I just fundamentally disagree with John," he said. "John said some nasty things about me the other day and then next time he saw me ran over to me and apologized. Maybe he'll apologize to Rumsfeld."

From Tokyo, Cheney is going to Australia, where the prime minister there is also under pressure to start withdrawing that nation's 2,000 troops from Iraq.

Libby Trial~Dick Cheney In The Spotlight

Parick J. Fitzgerald gave a brilliant closing statement in the Scooter Libby trial today. I think this part will go down in history. Whatever the outcome of the trial, we have seen the dark side exposed to the light of day.

Fitz: There is a cloud over the VP. He wrote those columns, he had those meetings, He sent Libby off to the meeting with Judy. Where Plame was discussed. That cloud remains because the denfendant obstructed justice. That cloud was there. That cloud is something that we just can’t pretend isn’t there.

Libby Trial shows that Chainey held the reigns

Vice President Dick Cheney has been a central figure in the trial of his former aide, I. Lewis Libby Jr. Final arguments may be heard today.


Trial Spotlights Cheney’s Power as an Infighter



By JIM RUTENBERG
Published: February 20, 2007
WASHINGTON, Feb. 19 — A picture taking shape from hours of testimony and reams of documents in the trial of I. Lewis Libby Jr. shatters any notion that the White House was operating as a model of cohesion throughout President Bush’s first term.

The trial against Mr. Libby has centered on a narrow case of perjury, with days of sparring between the defense and prosecution lawyers over the numbing details of three-year-old conversations between White House officials and journalists. But a close reading of the testimony and evidence in the case is more revelatory, bringing into bolder relief a portrait of a vice president with free rein to operate inside the White House as he saw fit in order to debunk the charges of a critic of the war in Iraq.

Thom Hartman now hosts the Al Franken show on Air America

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Franken’s successor set to go

Thom Hartmann on Air America

By Julia Silverman THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

The restaurant in Portland, Ore., that radio talk show host Thom Hartmann — comedian Al Franken’s heir apparent on Air America — has chosen for lunch speaks volumes.

On the one hand, it’s an old-fashioned Midwestern fish fry joint, where the perch comes battered and the fries are thickly cut, perfectly in keeping with the Michigan-born Hartmann’s well-honed message of economic populism, of the sort that’s been popping up with increasing frequency as both major parties try to lay claim to the country’s middle-class voters.

On the other hand, all the food served at the restaurant is gluten-free, and the menu takes care to note that the cooks use 100 percent rice bran oil — par for the course for a man whose broadcasting booth is virtually wallpapered with anti-right wing paraphernalia, including a poster of Dick Cheney dressed as a member of the Gestapo.

Thom Hartman who presently hosts a show on Air America KPOJ in Portland Oregon is known for his liberal views, and sunny disposition, as he takes on any comers on his talk show. You will be quickly corrected if you are presenting a bogus argument, and will have the facts set straight in a polite way. Get ready to hear about Democracy, and prepared to learn all about the Constitution, as Thom speaks truth to power, and exposes the travesties of justice commited by our current Corporate government.


Thom Hartmann Brings Context to Today's Political Frays


A BUZZFLASH INTERVIEW

The thing that the progressives within the Democratic Party apparently haven’t grasped – or if they have, they’ve simply been frustrated in their attempts to articulate it - is the power of incumbency and majority. The power of power itself. It aggregates. Over time, power adds to itself. ...


BuzzFlash: Under Tom Daschle’s leadership, and with the rather infamous leadership of Joe Lieberman on the committee that was responsible for investigating Enron –- the Democrats had this enormous scandal that was personally tied to the Bush Administration in many ways. Bush lied about his relationship with Ken Lay. It was symbolic of the corruption of so many corporations, and how stockholders, taxpayers and the government had been fleeced. But the Democrats basically did nothing with that. They were handed something, not of their making, but something that was a gift to hold out to the American people to say, here is what results from Republican policies. And they did nothing. That seemed almost inexplicable to us.

Thom Hartmann: To me it seems that was the result of two factors: the DLC’s influence on the Democratic Party, and Reagan’s war against organized labor, which is still ongoing. When Reagan came into power, a quarter of America’s workforce was unionized, so roughly half of America’s workforce had a good union job with benefits, retirement, job security, that sort of thing. Now we’re down to having just 8 or 9% of the private workforce unionized. So as Reagan’s war on organized labor was succeeding – and organized labor had been traditionally one of the largest sources of funding for the Democratic Party – Bill Clinton and others around him were looking around saying, where are we going to get some cash? It takes money to run for office.

They looked at what the Republicans had been doing basically since the 1880s, when they first started selling out to the railroads, with the Grant Administration’s railroad bribery scandals, for example. Clinton realized that the money’s with the corporations, and he said, "Let’s get in bed with them." And that spawned the new Democrats – the Democratic Leadership Council or DLC – and a tight corporate agenda.

We've got some Democrats who have sold out to the dark side, some who are beholden to the dark side, as it were – to the corporate force – some who were even in cahoots with Enron. So the Democratic Party wasn’t true to its founding principles any longer. A fair number of them had been as complacent in allowing the Enron scandal to happen as the Republicans had been.

Those Democrats who had a lot of power didn’t want things to be coming out that would harm their ability to get corporate money. So I don’t think that they missed the opportunity - I think they passed on the opportunity to go after Enron and corporations in general. Some of the more powerful forces within the Party basically took control and said, "We’re not going to go there."

Today that’s the battle that’s being played out for the heart and soul of the Democratic Party - between the DLC and their front groups, who are basically Republican lite – and the progressives within the Democratic Party.

After Downing Street is a nonpartisan coalition working to expose the lies that launched the war and to hold accountable its architects, including through censure and impeachmen

~HISTORY~Rumsfeld& Cheney were both caught lying about Zarqawi on video

Crooks & Liars September 10th, 2006

By: Jamie Holly on Sunday,

As I warned in my previous post, Cheney is out in full spin mode this morning when it comes to the rationale for the Iraq war. This is just an example from Meet the Press this morning of the spin he is trying to weave:

Cheney Tells Russert He Hasn’t Seen The Senate Intelligence Report.

~VIDEO~

Note that in this video Cheney claims that Zarqawi set up headquarters in Baghdad.

In the now famous of the interview of Rumsfeld by ex CIA George McGovern, Rummy is caught lying about the very same thing, and is exposed as a liar.

Aug. 2006 ~VIDEO~



Desperate Bush administration ends already blown Zarqawi deception

By Larry Chin
Online Journal Associate Editor


Jun 12, 2006, 00:50


The purported execution of “Al-Qaeda mystery man” Musab al-Zarqawi ends what was exposed two months ago as a Pentagon psychological operation in leaked military documents.

The pursuit of Zarqawi is being sold as the “turning point” of the Iraq war. It is nothing of the sort. This is another lie, heaped upon the multitude of lies that comprise the “war on terrorism” itself.

Zarqawi: Pentagon psy-op and intelligence asset

What is a well-established (and deliberately unaddressed) fact is that the United States government and US-connected intelligence agencies created Islamic “terrorism." The US and its allies have continued to use and guide terrorist cells, as well as fill worldwide media with “terrorism” propaganda.

WTO, TRIPS, and Pharmaceuticals for 3rd World Countries

Drug demands: Protestors shout slogans urging Novartis to withdraw its case against the government .
AP Photo

Novartis challenges Third World’s right to cancer lifeline

The pharmaceutical giant takes the government to court for not granting it the patent for a vital drug, reports Mihir Srivastava


India is the world’s largest supplier of cheap generic medicines to developing countries, supplying approximately 67 percent of it. India’s enormous capacity to produce cheap generic medicines is the biggest stumbling block for the extension of the market for patented drugs manufactured by pharmaceutical giants to developing countries, which are sold at astronomical prices. This has led pharmaceuticals major Novartis to sue the Indian government in the Madras High Court, accusing it of dishonouring its World Trade Organisation (WTO) patent obligations. Novartis is using Section 3(d) of the Patents Act on the pretext that it violates India’s WTO obligations. This case has lead to protests by health groups and patients all over the world

Under patent, Gleevec is sold at $2,600 per patient per month. The generic version is sold at $200 per patient per month.




Huffington Post 02.01.2007

Sunil Chacko

Patents and Public Health Crisis Moves Center-Stage

As activists attempted to deliver a fake coffin to the Washington DC office of the pharmaceutical giant Novartis and large demonstrations are underway in India and other countries over the seeming dichotomy between the rights of patent holders and patients, one has to ask if the predictable, and predicted, crisis could have been averted.

The Indian pharma-industry is a success story. Five hundred thousand people are employed in this sector, in roughly 20,000 firms. In the pre- and post-production sector, a further 2.5 million jobs are thought to be involved. Compared to the general price index, drug prices have risen much less in the last 15 years and remain far below average. 'Worldwide, India is a country of very low ... prices (for) high-quality medicines,' Nihchal H Israni, president of the Indian Drug Manufacturers' Association (IDMA), states proudly. Self-sufficiency with regard to pharmaceuticals is far above 70% - in spite of the policy of a more open economy pursued by India since 1991.

The secret of this success is the Indian patent law of 1970. India had entered independence with the patent system of the British colonial masters. This secured the Indian market for the British industry; pharmaceuticals were largely imported from abroad and local production was minimal. The 'architect' of the patent law of 1970, S Vedaraman, then director of the Indian Patent Office, summarises the principle as follows: 'We are not against patents. And we are prepared to pay decent licence fees. But we in India cannot afford monopolies.' Since then, India has done without product patents for pharmaceuticals, with the exception of production processes that may be patented for seven years. In addition, the law allowed for compulsory licences granted by the state, in the case of a patent holder's not granting voluntary licences on fair conditions. India profited from a large section of well-qualified experts who made good use of the new opportunities.


These moves did not find much favour with the multinational pharma-industry. It should not be forgotten, though, that in many industrial countries, the protection of inventions through patents was only developed in the last 30 years. The Swiss pharmaceutical industry, in particular, fought the enactment of a patent law at the end of the 19th century, in order to be able to imitate foreign drugs, such as Aspirin. In the German Reichstag (Parliament), Switzerland was considered a 'state of robber barons'; in France, it was labelled a 'country of counterfeiters'. Product patents for medical drugs have only been known in Switzerland since 1978. It is very clear whose interest they serve. Technology exporters profit from patent protection, which shields them from low-cost competition. Technology importers - in other words, most of the developing countries - want access to technical innovations as freely and cheaply as possible, i.e., no patent protection which creates monopolistic barriers. Indeed it was in this way that the economies of Japan, Korea and Taiwan were able to thrive, due to the beneficial absence of patents


For those of us who have attempted to alert everyone over many years that a serious problem was brewing, it is little consolation about the accuracy of the forecast. To their credit, a few senior U.S. Senators and Representatives and their aides have worked extensively on this matter, and I and an ex-Senator who was a close personal friend of the late President Ronald Reagan, together, repeatedly alerted top management of a major international agency that there were serious limitations in the assumptions on which the World Trade Organization's Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (WTO's TRIPS) Agreement was built. Using concrete proposals, we urged this agency chief and his agency, that receives billions of dollars from the U.S. Congress, to take proactive measures to avert this impending crisis through a combination of market and humanitarian compassionate means.


What is the crisis? Once the TRIPS agreement was acceded to by most nations and they in turn amended their national laws in conformity with the inter-governmental agreement, it became international law that product patents have superceded process patents. In less technical-speak, product patents i.e. the patenting of the molecule itself, and not the recipe to construct the molecule, became the norm. This is seen as vital to protect the rights of innovators that include individual scientists, companies, universities, government institutions and others that make up the networks of research and development. But what about the rights of several billion patients who live in countries where R&D was not an ingrained part of academic or professional life? Even in the U.S., patients who are able to afford medicines can do so only via multiple healthcare mechanisms such as health insurance coverage. But layers of mechanisms and functions to cover patients like medical insurance, specialized distribution chains etc. hardly exist for some 5 billion people living in the developing countries.


Suddenly, citing product patents and TRIPS, if companies make most new medicines unavailable to those who could previously access them, without any attempt to cover patients through alternate means, what sort of outcry from patients and doctors can one expect? That is the very crisis that is before us.


Former President Bill Clinton's Foundation, among others, procures anti-AIDS medicines from the Indian pharmaceutical industry, that is one of the world's largest as calculated in terms of volume of production, and it supplies an estimated 80% of African AIDS patients on medication with reverse-engineered medicines. And indeed, the vast majority of the world's 40 million HIV/AIDS patients live outside North America, Europe and Japan. Newer generations of more potent medicines against AIDS could be denied to those patients because of the changes necessitated by TRIPS. And, cancer patients who suffer from Chronic Myeloid Leukemia could lose access to Gleevec (imatinib mesylate) because of the patent case filed by Novartis before an Indian High Court, which explicitly attempts to get the Indian judiciary to rule on ensuring that the recently amended Indian patent laws become even more tightly congruent with TRIPS.


A fatal interpretation by many ingrained within TRIPS is the belief that when public health emergencies emerge, countries can issue compulsory licenses to permit any manufacturer to reverse-engineer the medicine needed. First, it takes a lifetime for most bureaucracies to even detect the presence of an epidemic of chronic diseases like cancers and heart diseases because of the paucity of reliable and timely data from across vast nations and continents. Second, contemplating to repeatedly issue compulsory licenses ignores the basic tenants of international finance in today's era. Every time it appears that a country is disrespecting intellectual property rights, capital will flee or take another generation to reappear. Why then did the TRIPS negotiators and framers make such unworkable safeguards the basis of inducing countries to sign on to the Agreement? And what can be done now that the Agreement has become codified into international law?


This should take up the urgent attention of the Congress, among the few parliaments in the world with truly open democratic traditions insisted upon by the founders, that can invite experts and patients to testify and build remedial measures. Because, once this crisis picks up even more steam, it will create yet another jarring roadblock to the duality of free and fair trade that is expected to create opportunities for all.




Bulletin von Medicus Mundi Schweiz Nr. 84, April 2002

*Richard Gerster, Dr. oec., (Richterswil/Switzerland), holds a PhD Econ of the University of St Gall, Switzerland. He is an independent consultant on issues of globalisation, trade, finance, development cooperation. He is author of several books and numerous articles in scientific journals and newspapers. His "Patents and Development. Lessons Learnt from the Economic History of Switzerland" has just been published by the Third World Network

People before patentsThe success story of the Indian pharmaceutical industry

The colonial patent law of 1911 secured the Indian market to British industry. A large majority of drugs were imported from abroad until the Patents Act 1970 brought a turnaround. Early in the 21st century India has a highly efficient pharmaceutical industry, blossoming thanks to the weak patent protection of medicines. It provides essential drugs at affordable prices and creates considerable employment. Today over 90 percent of modern medicine consumed in India are produced locally. By 1 January 2005 India will have to comply with the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The new rules of the game may threaten India’s achievements. During the last 20 years India enjoyed an annual rate of economic growth of six percent on an average. The pharmaceutical industry is part of India’s success story.

Von Richard Gerster *

"These days, when Indian migrants return from their home leave to the United States, you can be sure they carry lots of generic ciprofloxacin tablets with them", told me Ashish Shirsat, marketing manager of Blue Cross Laboratories Ltd. In Mumbai (formerly Bombay), India. The antibiotic Ciprofloxacin is in the US under patent up to 2003 from the German manufacturer Bayer and arrived in the media limelight following the growing anthrax scare and fear about bioterrorism. The returnees know why they do not buy Bayer’s brand "Cipro" but one of 78 Indian brands. Blue Cross Laboratories indicate production costs for a 500mg tablet of 4 cents, a wholesale price of 7 cents, and a consumer price in the Indian drugstores of about 10 cents, depending on the manufacturer. Under political pressure Bayer offered the Cipro tablet at the "discount" price of 95 cents to the US Government. The regular Bayer wholesale price in the US is US$ 3.60, and the US consumer price US$ 6 – 60 times the price in India. Dr. Y.K. Hamied, Chairman of Cipla Ltd., a leading Indian drug manufacturer, called the anthrax/cipro-case "an eye-opener that developing countries cannot afford patent monopolies".
The case of HIV/AIDSCipla gained global reputation in the fight against HIV/AIDS. It was only in 1987 that the first HIV-positive case was registered in India, yet India already shows with officially 3.86 million the highest number of HIV-positive people in the world beside South Africa. Cipla Chairman Y.K. Hamied: "We should face the reality that India adds 3’500 HIV-positive cases every day, and a recent World Bank report says there will be 35 million cases by 2005 in India. This makes something like the recent earthquake in Gujarat look like a tea party." In the red-light districts of the mega city Mumbai and along the truck routes the epidemic is spreading particularly fast. Ignorance and poverty are the most important causes of this. Often, AIDS patients die of tuberculosis, an illness still prevalent in India, because they lack the necessary resistance.
While the term HIV is used to describe the virus, AIDS is the name for the most severe phase of the illness triggered by the virus. There is no cure (yet) for HIV/AIDS. The number of HIV/AIDS deaths has, however, dramatically decreased in the USA and in Europe. Take Switzerland as an example: the number of AIDS deaths annually has dropped from a peak of 686 (1994) to 42 (2000). This must be attributed in the first place to the revolutionary drug combination therapy, which disturbs the life cycle of the HI-Virus. A disciplined taking of a combination of medical drugs can prevent the outbreak of AIDS or at least delay it for years. In particular, the transmission of the virus from a mother to her unborn child can be prevented with suitable medication.
In India, only 500 of 100 000 HIV/AIDS patients at most are getting medical treatment. Sexuality and along with it AIDS are taboo subjects. There is a widespread lack of hospitals and clinics, of personnel, of medical equipment, of medical drugs. There are no compulsory medical insurance schemes in India. AIDS is particularly common in the lower income groups. These people often do casual work only. A monthly income of less than US$ 100 has to cover the basic necessities of life. There are often two infected persons per family but the savings are hardly sufficient for the treatment of one. "Although women and men are equally affected by HIV/AIDS, 85 percent of our patients are men. According to the Indian patriarchal culture they get preference. Second in line are children. Women sacrifice themselves for the others". This is how Dr Subhash K. Hira, director of the AIDS Research and Control Centre (ARCON) in Mumbai, describes the everyday situation.
A few years ago, the costs of an individual AIDS-combination therapy in India were, at US$ 8 500 per year, prohibitively high. But then, in 1993, Cipla Ltd. introduced the AIDS drug Zidovudine. Stavudine, Lamivudine and Nevirapine followed. They are all elements of the successful virus-inhibiting combination therapy. Cipla offered the AIDS drugs significantly cheaper than other companies. This in turn provoked the lowering of prices by the international competitors on the Indian market. In 2001, Cipla offered the anti-retroviral package at US$ 600 per year and patient to all African governments, and at US$ 350 or US$ 1 a day to the non-governmental charity "Doctors without Borders". This compares with annual costs of more than US$ 10 000 in Europe and the US. Even at the low price level, purchasing of anti-retrovirals is beyond the budget of most of the developing countries. In an interview published in the South Bulletin in June 2001, Dr. C. P. Thakur, Minister for Health and Family Welfare in India, said: "If you were going to give anti-retrovirals to 10 per cent of our population affected with HIV/AIDS, you will be spending more than total the health budget of the country".

NSA spying on American citizens

AT&T's Implementation of NSA Spying on American Citizens

Former AT&T technician Mark Klein is the key witness in the Electronic Frontier Foundation's class-action lawsuit against the telecommunications company, which alleges that AT&T cooperated in an illegal National Security Agency domestic surveillance program.

I wrote the following document in 2004 when it became clear to me that AT&T, at the behest of the National Security Agency, had illegally installed secret computer gear designed to spy on internet traffic. At the time I thought this was an outgrowth of the notorious Total Information Awareness program, which was attacked by defenders of civil liberties. But now it's been revealed by The New York Times that the spying program is vastly bigger and was directly authorized by President Bush, as he himself has now admitted, in flagrant violation of specific statutes and constitutional protections for civil liberties. I am presenting this information to facilitate the dismantling of this dangerous Orwellian project.

AT&T has installed secret computor gear to spy on internet traffic.

NarusInsight Intercept Suite

Packet-level, flow-level, and application-level usage information is captured and analyzed as well as raw user session packets for forensic analysis, surveillance or in satisfying regulatory compliance for lawful intercept.

The Lawful Intercept module offers carriers and service providers compliance with regulatory requirements regarding lawful intercept. The Lawful Intercept module provides an end-to-end solution consisting of Administration, Access and Delivery functions. The Lawful Intercept module is compliant with CALEA and ETSI standards. It can be seamlessly integrated with third party products for testing/validation or as a complete law enforcement solution.

The Directed Analysis module seamlessly integrates with NarusInsight Secure Suite or other DDoS, intrusion or anomaly detection systems, securely providing analysts with real-time, surgical targeting of suspect information (from flow to application to full packets). The Directed Analyis module provides industry standard formats and offers tools for archival and integration with third party investigative tools.

~THE WAR PRAYER~Mark Twain

Outraged by American military intervention in the Phillipines, Mark Twain wrote this and sent it to Harper's Bazaar. This women's magazine rejected it for being too radical, and it wasn't published until after Mark Twain's death, when World War I made it even more timely. It appeared in Harper's Monthly, November 1916.

The War Prayer

by Mark Twain March 1905

WAR IS A RACKET

WAR IS A RACKET

by Two-Time Congressional Medal of Honor Recipient:

Major General Smedley D. Butler, USMC [Retired]


WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.

In the World War [I] a mere handful garnered the profits of the conflict. At least 21,000 new millionaires and billionaires were made in the United States during the World War. That many admitted their huge blood gains in their income tax returns. How many other war millionaires falsified their tax returns no one knows.

How many of these war millionaires shouldered a rifle? How many of them dug a trench? How many of them knew what it meant to go hungry in a rat-infested dug-out? How many of them spent sleepless, frightened nights, ducking shells and shrapnel and machine gun bullets? How many of them parried a bayonet thrust of an enemy? How many of them were wounded or killed in battle?

Out of war nations acquire additional territory, if they are victorious. They just take it. This newly acquired territory promptly is exploited by the few – the selfsame few who wrung dollars out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.

And what is this bill?

This bill renders a horrible accounting. Newly placed gravestones. Mangled bodies. Shattered minds. Broken hearts and homes. Economic instability. Depression and all its attendant miseries. Back-breaking taxation for generations and generations.

For a great many years, as a soldier, I had a suspicion that war was a racket; not until I retired to civil life did I fully realize it. Now that I see the international war clouds gathering, as they are today, I must face it and speak out.


About General Smedley D. Butler

In his 1935 book, War is a Racket, Butler presented an exposé and trenchant condemnation of the profit motive behind warfare. His views on the subject are well summarized in the following passage from a 1935 issue of "the non-Marxist, socialist" magazine, Common Sense — one of Butler's most widely quoted statements:

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested.
Smedley Butler died at Naval Hospital, Philadelphia, June 21, 1940.

The Plame investigation in a nut shell

INTELLIGENCE LEAKS Cheney's Call


By Murray Waas, National Journal
© National Journal Group Inc.
Thursday, Feb. 15, 2007

The vice president's actions in 2002 helped set events in motion that led to the prosecution of Scooter Libby, his own chief of staff

Early on the morning of June 20, 2002, then-Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Bob Graham, D-Fla., received a telephone call at home from a highly agitated Dick Cheney. Graham, who was in the middle of shaving, held a razor in one hand as he took the phone in the other.

The vice president got right to the point: A story in his morning newspaper reported that telephone calls intercepted by the National Security Agency on September 10, 2001, apparently warned that Al Qaeda was about to launch a major attack against the United States, possibly the next day. But the intercepts were not translated until September 12, 2001, the story said, the day after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

You will see this on Fox News

Keep Your Friends Close...
Humane Society workers marveling at mother cat that adopted 6-day-old Rottweiler puppy rejected by its mother

Body of EvidenceLawyers argue who gets Anna Nicole's body
Battle waged in Florida judge's chamber over what to do with Smith's body; Bahamian CSI conduct search

• VIDEO: Judge Says the 'Body Belongs to Me Now'
• VIDEO: Former Sister-in-Law on Anna Nicole's Early Years

Cigar-Gate Rep: Sorry for the StinkFreshman Democratic congressman says 'sorry' for causing commotion by calling police to report Republican's cigar smoke

Fuel Scandal Crashes Daytona 500NASCAR crackdown nets five crews; Michael Waltrip apologizes, says he'll race PHOTO ESSAY VIDEO

RECENT NEWS

Bush Presses NATO for More Afghan Troops

Auditors: Billions of U.S. Dollars Wasted in Iraq

Teacher Convicted of Having Kids Undress

Webcams Set Up at Tense Holy Building Site

Snow Traps Jet Passengers for 9 Hours

Cops: Woman Stabs Lover to Drink His Blood

Batman Sighting Puts Schools on Lockdown

Ancient Coin Shows Cleopatra Was No Beauty

Salmonella Outbreak Linked to Peanut Butter

Man Gets Death for Ant-Breeding Scheme

New Dollar Coin Goes Into Circulation

Al Gore to Rock On Against Global Warming

Ex-NBA Star: 'I Hate Gay People'

Baby Delivered Into Mother's Sweatpants

'Playboy' Sergeant Stripped From Ranks?

Florida Teen on Third Week of Hiccups

Think about it....

You won't see this on Fox News

Iran Test-Fires Russian Air Defence Missiles


Tehran (AFP) Feb 07, 2007
Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards on Wednesday successfully test-fired a new Russian-made air defence missile system, whose delivery last month sparked bitter US criticism. The test-firing of the surface-to-air missiles, on the first of two days of war games by the Guards' air force and naval divisions, comes amid mounting tensions with the West over the Iranian nuclear programme.
Iranian state television showed several missiles from the TOR-M1 system being fired in the desert from mobile vehicle launchers and then successfully taking out their targets in the sky.

"We have successfully test-fired the new modern TOR-M1 defence system, within the framework of the Revolutionary Guards defence doctrine based on a military strategy of deterrence," Revolutionary Guards air force commander Hossein Salami was quoted as telling the ISNA news agency.

"The Iranian armed forces have added the new missile system to its defences to consolidate its defence capabilities," he said.

Russia only completed the delivery of the missiles in January. Tehran and Moscow in 2005 signed a contract for the purchase of 29 TOR-M1 missile systems estimated to be worth 700 million dollars (540 million euros).

The United States had urged Russia to cancel the sale, saying it was a mistake when the UN Security Council had imposed sanctions against Iran's ballistic missile industry as part of measures against its nuclear drive.

"We don't think that it's an appropriate signal to be sending ... particularly when they are under UN sanctions for trying to develop a nuclear weapon, and when they continue to be in defiance of UN Security Council resolutions," deputy State Department spokesman Tom Casey said in January.

Russia has significant economic interests in Iran and succeeded in watering down the December Security Council resolution against Tehran, limiting it to targetted sanctions against the Iranian nuclear and ballistics industries.

Salami said that the "agile and very accurate" TOR-M1 system has a 12 kilometre (7.2 mile) range that could be increased to 20 kilometres (12 miles).

"The TOR-M1 is capable of confronting small aircraft, aircraft with high manoeuvre and speed abilities and cruise missiles, and in less than a second it is ready to spot and be launched again," he said.

"This system can hit targets accurately and is able to immune itself against diversions carried out by radars and be successful in electronic war."

An image grab taken from footage shown by the Iranian Al-Alam TV shows Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards firing a new Russian-made air defence missile system at an unidentified location in Iran, 07 February 2007. Iran's Revolutionary Guards today successfully test-fired the new TOR-M1 air defence missile system, whose delivery last month sparked bitter US criticism. The test-firing of the surface-to-air missiles, on the first of two days of war games by the Guards' air force and naval divisions, comes amid mounting tensions with the West over the Iranian nuclear programme. Photo courtesy AFP

General Peter Pace on Bush's Iran Policy

Pace will not link bombs to Iranian government

Marine Corps News
Staff report
Posted : Wednesday Feb 14, 2007 7:48:18 EST

In an interview with Voice of America, Marine General Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said he did not agree with military leaders in Baghdad, who told reporters on Sunday that the government of Iran is providing roadside bombs to Iraqi insurgents.

According to the Associated Press, the U.S. military presentation in Baghdad on Sunday was the result of weeks of preparation and revisions as U.S. officials put together a package of material to support the Bush administration's claims of Iranian intercession on behalf of militant Iraqis fighting American forces.

The experts, who spoke to a large gathering of reporters on condition that they not be further identified, said the supply trail began with Iran's Revolutionary Guards Quds Force, which also is accused of arming the Hezbollah guerrilla army in Lebanon. The officials said the EFP weapon was first tested there.

The deadly and highly sophisticated weapons are known as "explosively formed penetrators," or EFPs, which have killed more than 170 troops from the American-led coalition. Three senior military officials in Baghdad said the "machining process" used in the construction of the deadly bombs had been traced to Iran.

General Pace said he could not, from his own knowledge, repeat the assertion that the elite Quds brigade of Iran’s Republican Guard force is providing bomb-making kits to Iraqi Shiite insurgents, VOA reported.

“We know that the explosively formed projectiles are manufactured in Iran. What I would not say is that the Iranian government, per se [specifically], knows about this,” he told VOA. “It is clear that Iranians are involved, and it’s clear that materials from Iran are involved, but I would not say by what I know that the Iranian government clearly knows or is complicit,” he said.

General Pace made his comments during a visit to Australia.




In the current issue of Marine Corps Times is a poll that shows a large majority of the readers are not in agreement with the Bush administration.

Quick question The U.S. Surge in Iraq

President Bush has put in motion a controversial plan to deploy 21,500 more U.S. troops to Iraq, most of them to Baghdad, in an effort to quell the sectarian violence that continues to rage there. What do you think of this plan?

It will turn the tide 16.52 % (750)

It's worth a try 26.74 % (1214)

Too little, too late 53.08 % (2410)

No opinion 3.66 % (166)Total votes: 4540















Click on picture for a little more action

Tehran's Iraq role unclear, U.S. now says

But Bush calls it irrelevant that no solid evidence links Iranian officials to alleged weapons aid.

WASHINGTON — U.S. officials from President Bush to a top general in Baghdad said Wednesday that there was no solid evidence that high-ranking officials in Iran had ordered deadly weapons to be sent to Iraq for use against American troops, backing away from claims made by military and intelligence officials in Baghdad this week.

Main Stream Media: Secrets Sources and Spin

Last night PBS Frontline aired the first in a four part series on the MSN (main stream media). Much of this relates to the ongoing trial of Scooter Libby, and the outing of Valerie Plame.



PBS Frontline: News War


In a four-hour special, News War, FRONTLINE examines the political, cultural, legal, and economic forces challenging the news media today and how the press has reacted in turn. Through interviews with key figures in print, broadcast and electronic media over the past four decades -- and with unequaled, behind-the-scenes access to some of today's most important news organizations, FRONTLINE traces the recent history of American journalism, from the Nixon administration's attacks on the media to the post-Watergate popularity of the press, to the new challenges presented by the war on terror and other global forces now changing -- and challenging -- the role of the press in our society.



In part one of News War:
Secrets, Sources & Spin, FRONTLINE examines the political and legal forces challenging the mainstream news media today and how the press has reacted in turn. Correspondent Lowell Bergman talks to the major players in the debates over the role of journalism in 2007, examining the relationship between the Bush administration and the press; the controversies surrounding the use of anonymous sources in reporting from Watergate to the present; and the unintended consequences of the Valerie Plame investigation -- a confusing and at times ugly affair that ultimately damaged both reporters' reputations and the legal protections they thought they enjoyed under the First Amendment.

~VIDEO~

Part two continues with the legal jeopardy faced by a number of reporters across the country, and the additional complications generated by the war on terror. Correspondent Lowell Bergman interviews reporters facing jail for refusing to reveal their sources in the context of leak investigations and asks questions on tough issues that now confront the editors of the nation's leading newspapers, including: how much can the press reveal about secret government programs in the war on terror without jeopardizing national security? FRONTLINE looks past the heated, partisan rhetoric to determine how much of this battle is politics and whether such reporting actually harms national security.

The third hour of News War puts viewers on the front lines of an epic battle over the future of news. America's major network news divisions and daily newspapers are under siege, facing mounting pressure for profits from corporate owners, and growing challenges from cable television and the Internet, which are remaking the economics of the business and transforming the very definition of news. FRONTLINE talks to network executives, journalists, Wall Street analysts, bloggers, and key players at Google and Yahoo! who are all battling for survival and market dominance in a rapidly changing world of news. FRONTLINE also goes inside the embattled newsroom of The Los Angeles Times, one of the last remaining papers in the country still covering major national stories. Under severe pressure from Wall Street to cut costs and to compete for "eyeballs" in a new media world, editors at the paper are urgently trying to figure out what this means for their future news coverage and their public service mission.

The fourth hour of News War looks at media around the globe to reveal the international forces that influence journalism and politics in the United States. The lead story focuses on the new Arab media and its role in both mitigating and exacerbating the clash between the West and Islam. With a focus on Al Jazeera and how it has changed the face of a parochial and tightly controlled Arab media, this hour explores Al Jazeera's growing influence around the world -- from Muslim communities in Europe to the pending launch of a new English-language service that will be broadcast in the United States.

In a four-hour special, News War, FRONTLINE examines the political, cultural, legal, and economic forces challenging the news media today and how the press has reacted in turn. Through interviews with key figures in print, broadcast and electronic media over the past four decades -- and with unequaled, behind-the-scenes access to some of today's most important news organizations, FRONTLINE traces the recent history of American journalism, from the Nixon administration's attacks on the media to the post-Watergate popularity of the press, to the new challenges presented by the war on terror and other global forces now changing -- and challenging -- the role of the press in our society.