Hey everybody, it's not a done-deal yet. al Sadar might have something to say about this -- ya think? He is already demonstrating in very large numbers, if that doesn't work, we can expect a revolution. Come to think about it, maybe that is what Bush wants??

The former Superpower, the nation that gave people hope, now a Duperpower, anything it says it will do is a lie. Anything it says it is, is a lie. The Duperpower, the only thing it loves is the god of war, Mars and to that it will sacrifice the peace and security of the world for eternity if it can. I'm not talking about the American people I'm talking about The Real America, the America that owns the American people that has taken their independence and dealt it the most savage blows.

Obama, when he is the next president sure has his work cut out for him. Can he stop the Shock Doctrine? Will the American people back him on that? Does America have the guts to take on the Military-Industrial-Mediaplex and beat it back into the shadows it came from? Or is that too big an ask?

If this illegal treaty is pushed through without any confirmation from Congress why would President Obama be bound by it? If this "deal" is not debated and agreed to by the US, no future administration worth a whit would let it prevent the withdrawal of US troops.

Thanks, armchair. It amazes me how many people look at the US client state in the middle east, Israel, as somehow controlling the largest, most heavily armed, most aggressive country in the world. Who forced the US to attack other countries before Israel was formed, people?

Israel does what the US wants. If it stopped, it would be obliterated. The Zionist Jews who think they control the crazy Christians in charge of our country do not realize that they are being used. Look at Ann Coulter, who announced that all Jews must convert to be more perfect.

The people running our government think that Christ is returning and there will be a final showdown. Israel is part of this in their twisted minds. The Jews will have to convert, or be killed with every non-Christian on earth.

Focus, people. It's hard to choose which religion is most irrational, but they are all up to no good.

Did I hear a buy signal for Blackwater stock?

does israel use the usa for zionist policy, or does the usa use israel as a longterm irritant to break mideast cultural deadlocks toward one world corporate govt.? both. dan, ur right about that oil, except my guess: jordan WILL definately back the pipeline, no question, and that would be staying well within their previous policy paradigms.

If amerika expended a fraction of its diabolic military might on that open sore called Izrael which has been infecting Palestine in particular, the Middle East and the rest of the planet for far too long then the Iraqis would sell them their oil at a fraction of the cost, eat their diesel fried futter and smoke themselves to death on marlboro weeds. The reason amerikans don't get it is of course because the Izrael mob own the United Snakes lock stock and barrel. 2.6 per cent of the population and 100 per cent of the media and foreign policy. Talk about a banana republic!

Still maybe Obama if he ain't Al Jolsen will finally pull the plug and drain the AIPAC JINSA swamp that has been breeding death and contagion for amerikan rednecks not to mention stealing the hard earned cash from amerikan tax cattle more than half a century.

A secret deal being negotiated in Baghdad would perpetuate the American military occupation of Iraq indefinitely, regardless of the outcome of the US presidential election in November.

I was wondering how these neoCons were going to pull this one off. I knew they would never relinquish all the hard work they have done and efforts towards a OneWorldGovernment.

I figured there would probably be an assasination sometime before elections thus requiring martial law and No elections. Complainers will be put in Homeland Security camps which have already been built. Thus the end of "democratic America" as we have known it.

For this is what happens when you take impeachment off the table when you are dealing with liar, murderer criminal types; ie Bush and his PrinciPals.

This folks, this secret negotiation to continue this route despite the outcome of USA elections, is our only chance to avoid the lockdown that will come if they have to resort to assasination and martial law. A deal with the devil? See prior paragraph.

Let's not forget that we need a base from which to attack Iran for The Zionists without all the troublesome negotiations with Iran's neighbors on her west side.

There seems to be a lot of blurring the lines here, as angel2shine has shown. From my posts on Israel, you identify me as a Zionist, but I have only stood up against expulsion of the Jews from Israel as the rest of you have called for. I have said that talks need to happen and the Israeli's and Palestinians need to work together to make things work for both populations. However, I have never been on the side of this administration and worked for both the Gore and Kerry campaigns. You have to stop lumping people into categories as either/or. That is not a liberal, accepting attitude!

Even Zionists are starting to stray from this administration.
Namaste,

http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/fr/fr030416_1_n.shtml

Oil from Iraq : An Israeli pipedream?

16 April 2003

Israel stands to benefit greatly from the US led war on Iraq, primarily by getting rid of an implacable foe in President Saddam Hussein and the threat from the weapons of mass destruction he was alleged to possess. But it seems the Israelis have other things in mind.

An intriguing pointer to one potentially significant benefit was a report by Haaretz on 31 March that minister for national infrastructures Joseph Paritzky was considering the possibility of reopening the long-defunct oil pipeline from Mosul to the Mediterranean port of Haifa. With Israel lacking energy resources of its own and depending on highly expensive oil from Russia, reopening the pipeline would transform its economy.

To resume supplies from Mosul to Haifa would require the approval of whatever Iraqi government emerges and presumably the Jordanian government, through whose territory it would be likely to run. Paritzky's ministry was reported to have said on 9 April that it would hold discussions with Jordanian authorities on resuming oil supplies from Mosul, with one source saying the Jordanians were "optimistic". Jordan, aware of the deep political sensitivities involved, immediately denied there were any such talks.

Paritzky said he was certain the USA would respond favourably to the idea of resurrecting the pipeline. Indeed, according to Western diplomatic sources in the region, the USA has discussed this with Iraqi opposition groups.

It is understood from diplomatic sources that the Bush administration has said it will not support lifting UN sanctions on Iraq unless Saddam's successors agree to supply Israel with oil.

All of this lends weight to the theory that Bush's war is part of a masterplan to reshape the Middle East to serve Israel's interests. Haaretz quoted Paritzky as saying that the pipeline project is economically justifiable because it would dramatically reduce Israel's energy bill.

US efforts to get Iraqi oil to Israel are not surprising. Under a 1975 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), the US guaranteed all Israel's oil needs in the event of a crisis. The MoU, which has been quietly renewed every five years, also committed the USA to construct and stock a supplementary strategic reserve for Israel, equivalent to some US$3bn in 2002. Special legislation was enacted to exempt Israel from restrictions on oil exports from the USA.

Moreover, the USA agreed to divert oil from its home market, even if that entailed domestic shortages, and guaranteed delivery of the promised oil in its own tankers if commercial shippers were unwilling or not available to carry the crude to Israel. All of this adds up to a potentially massive financial commitment.

The USA has another reason for supporting Paritzky's project: a land route for Iraqi oil direct to the Mediterranean would lessen US dependence on Gulf oil supplies. Direct access to the world's second-largest oil reserves (with the possibility of expansion through so-far untapped deposits) is an important strategic objective.

477 of 983 words
End of non-subscriber extract

What Americans and the politicians don't understand is that there is no compromise in the Middle East - this is not a word or concept in their culture.

It is an all or nothing proposition. To label someone as an extremist will not help move forward their political cause either.

They will never allow a foreign invader to occupy their lands - this will not happen in our lifetime.
Someone should have been briefed on the cultural playbook.

You cannot take 4000 years of history and erase it and expect to proselytyse into a democratic (Christian) community overnight. This is a pipe dream on the part of many (neocon) zealots!

Permanent holy war for the Sacred National Comfy-Comfy Lifestyle! Welcome to the crowning moment of Christian Capitalist Patriarchy---

Largely overlooked is the part of this proposed US-Iraq "agreement" that would allow the US to strike any country from inside Iraq. In order to grasp the full significance, try to recall the furor over the placement of some Russian missiles in Cuba. It damn near resulted in WW3.

And anyone who believes that such an "agreement" would simply be overturned and set aside by ANY subsequent US administration is just dreaming in technicolor.

another ramification of this is that any attempt by the west ether independantly or thru the UN etc to monitor the nuclear programs of other Middle Eastern countrys will be viewed as a prelude to invasion not a genuine attempt to prevent the horror of nuclear war..
...who will trust the concept of allowing weapons inspectors into your country now?

yawwwwn. this was expected. actually, this is what its been in iraq, why change? lock it in, undermine the new iraqi govt and obama, and set it up for TERRORwar forever, until nothing is left and life in the "homeland" becomes little more than rationlines, security checkpoints and ducking balckwater's bullets as our society melts down.. to protect us all. from terror. what an insane ride its been since 911. so sad given the silly dreams we had, like joy n peace n shit. the sad part is it wont change much fundamentally under obama.

the even sadder part is that 1/2 of americans supported this war because it was secretly "for oil". after all, hard decisions needed to be made, for america.. WRONG, if it was for oil, then why are we paying 300% more at the pumps than we did before the war. wait, of course it WAS for oil. but not for america. not for americans. it was for MULTINATIONAL OIL CORPORATIONS to make a profit. if the moron republican base really understood it wasnt for americas oil, even nascar would have voted against the war.

First time poster, long time lurker.

I watched the press conference from the State Dept. on C-Span w/Crocker. He was asked by 2 different reporters about the bases & the immunity issue. As expected, he denied they wanted the bases. He then scuttled backward like a crawdad about the immunity question, saying it'd be improper for him to answer, as the talks were still going on. No real big surprises here!

BY the way, does anyone else get as irritated as I when TRYING to listen to Crocker talk?! His constant "uhs","umms" & long pauses irks me no end! If anything, I think it's very revealing that he's lying, & I try to keep that in mind while listening, but it's still an effort.

Also, when it comes to Petraeus, I think the evidence so far CONFIRMS he indeed should be called "Betray us". I think MoveOn got it so right, even though they were blasted for it. I recall reading a statement made about him by Admiral Fallon right before they chunked him for his views concerning Iran that called him an "a**kisser".

One last thing that concerns me; I think this may be the action they're taking to provoke Iran. It'll be another Gulf of Tonkin incident, of course, but they'll do it anyway, right?

I mean, they pulled off the 9/11 attacks, & most of America still sleeps. What's to stop them?

Pax Romana

Pax Americana

There is no difference here, empires alway decline and fall.

"The new American century" is going to be "The no American century" , I do feel sorry for the normal decent people of the US.

Iraq is really no different from all of America's other illegal imperial conquests: Just this time they (BushCheneyCrims) are far more brazen, and lets face it, America swallowed the whole lie when the rest of the world was going "What the ..."

Please follow this link and read this list

http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html

And this list doesn't even include the ideological invasion's by the "Chicago Boys" into south and central america from 60's - present.

CC

Why would an agreement made between an administration (that stole itself into office, committed war crimes, tortured prisoners, shredded the constitution and Habeas Corpus) and a colonial-style puppet government that hasn't even enough power to kick out the mercenary force, Blackwater (as it swore it would do after the massacre of dozens of unarmed civilians) be binding on the next president?

The cowardice and complicity of the Democratic Party knows no limits. If I were the next president I would just rip it up and point out that Congress has to approve treaties. Period.

"The US is holding hostage some $50bn (£25bn) of Iraq's money in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to pressure the Iraqi government into signing an agreement seen by many Iraqis as prolonging the US occupation indefinitely, according to information leaked to The Independent.

US negotiators are using the existence of $20bn in outstanding court judgments against Iraq in the US, to pressure their Iraqi counterparts into accepting the terms of the military deal, details of which were reported for the first time in this newspaper yesterday."

America, the Land of Bilk and Money.

If this is true, then those leading the Iraqi govt. have made themselves rightful targets for true Iraqi patriots. It is that simple.

Gail writes, just above (9:59) that she hopes "everyone will keep watching and listening to Obama's message. He is not going to allow the U.S. or Israeli neocons to dictate the same failing policies we have witnessed in the Middle East over the past 7+ years...."

- I just read Obama's speech given at yesterday's AIPAC conference. This same exact speech could easily have been given by Bush, Hillary, or McCain, or any neocon. It contains precisely the same definition of enemies, & the same tacit assumption that Israel & the US are always morally justified in what they do, veritable "lights unto the world," & possessing every right to batter the wicked Iran, Syria, Hamas, & Hezbollah into submission. There was no mention whatever of any of America's or Israel's horrid crimes of aggression.

Read John Walsh's article on CounterPunch.

-----------

I note here that CD is censoring my attempts to post -- about 1 in 20 of my attempts to post are permitted to get through the block.

Hello all,

A lot of speculation and running off of the mouth and not enough sources(just a "leak" from who?)to confirm this. 50 bases? Maybe this is all true but I'm not hanging my hat on an unconfirmed rumor.

I hope everyone will keep watching and listening to Obama's message. He is not going to allow the U.S. or Israeli neocons to dictate the same failing policies we have witnessed in the Middle East over the past 7+ years.

The distorted and damaging neocon economic policies in addition to the "kill the Infidel" jihadist religious insanity will hopefully come to an end under an Obama adminstration. He is not going to tolerate this idiotic bullsh!t from either group of political or religious misfits intent on destroying the human race to save or serve their own ideological stupidity at the expense of everyone else living on this planet!

How long is going to take before the people on this planet wake up to the fact that we are a "species" of the same creator, whatever or whoever that creator may be?

I'm surprised - only 2 of the posters above mention the word "colonialism." But that's what it is, pure and simple: 21st century colonialism.

Hey - does this "secret" pact/plan/whatever allow "us" to rename what's left of Iraq? Like, Floraqida? Or TexIraq? Or Puerto Iraqia?

Funny, no mention of how much oil we'll be "allowed" to steal without supervision or accounting... must be part of the super secret pact/plan/whatever we'll learn about next week.

Kudos to the leaker!

I'm going to give everyone a hint. If the American ppl agree to something; it is because they want it. First, understand why they want it. Don't dowplay the reason. Don't call it 'stupid' and expect them to need 're-education'. Progessives MUST get in touch with the reason the american ppl feel this way, not simply invent a ploy to fool them.

Mimi,

Most people have no idea of the dual nationalities of some of the leading proponents of this occupation.

I am one of the least prejudiced people on earth but I question American policies supporting a theocratic state formulated by dual citizenship officials.

What is even more interesting is the connection of so many of the names that you have listed are in organizations, Pacs, commissions and councils that many in this nation have no idea are so interconnected. This is a family of criminals. We all live in the Mafia neighborhood now. And the Jewish mafia is one of the largest.

So watch carefully who supports what policy as we are on the outside looking in. You might have security clearance to mop the floors after the soiree or trim the trees and water the plants but guaranteed you are not about to be a card carrying member of this top echelon.

Greg Palast has done some really good writing about this very far reaching territorial nation building and has some great rationale developed about the reasons why.

Good information Mimi.

Mimi,

Most people have no idea of the dual nationalities of some of the leading proponents of this occupation.

I am one of the least prejudiced people on earth but I question American policies supporting a theocratic state formulated by dual citizenship officials.

What is even more interesting is the connection of so many of the names that you have listed are in organizations, Pacs, commissions and councils that many in this nation have no idea are so interconnected. This is a family of criminals. We all live in the Mafia neighborhood now. And the Jewish mafia is one of the largest.

So watch carefully who supports what policy as we are on the outside looking in. You might have security clearance to mop the floors after the soiree or trim the trees and water the plants but guaranteed you are not about to be a card carrying member of this top echelon.

LOng ago

People are thinking way to sophisticated. Sometimes the solutions are very small and in plain view. They are so simple that people dismiss them. They have the power, the money, the military, and the media. You cannot beat them on their terms. You can stop them with the millions of little things within your control. A well placed error here or an omission there...you know....little stuff done consistently. Just screw things up.lol...

Ultimately this is going to lead to the conclusion that the US is just too big for it's britches. We cannot continue our professed belief in democracy and our economic focus on producing WMD.

AIPAC does not represent all American jews. They represent the neocon element in Israel and the US. So yes, his pledge to AIPAC is a concern.

Obamas pledge to pull out of Iraq, while pledging to AIPAC to do whatever it takes to remove the "threat" is contradictory. Any attack on Iran, would require a permanent presence in Iraq since all hell would break out from here to eternity. Iran would really get involved in Iraq if we were to attack them and then leave.

The main concern on Israels influence in US policy is the fact we have so many dual nationals in government. How can one be both an Israeli citizen and an American citizen, and make a decision that may adversely affect one or the other. Lets face it, Israeli and American interests can conflict. This is the larger issue.

Just look at this list of dual nationalities in government :

http://www.viewzone.com/dualcitizen.html

"Michael Mukasey

Recently appointed as US Attorney General. Mukasey also was the judge in the litigation between developer Larry Silverstein and several insurance companies arising from the destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11/2001.

Michael Chertoff

Former Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division, at the Justice Department; now head of Homeland Security.

Richard Perle

One of Bush's foreign policy advisors, he is the chairman of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board. A very likely Israeli government agent, Perle was expelled from Senator Henry Jackson's office in the 1970's after the National Security Agency (NSA) caught him passing Highly-Classified (National Security) documents to the Israeli Embassy. He later worked for the Israeli weapons firm, Soltam. Perle came from one the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktanks, the AEI. Perle is one of the leading pro-Israeli fanatics leading this Iraq war mongering within the administration and now in the media.

Paul Wolfowitz

Paul Wolfowitz has been rewarded with a new position in the Bush administration which will allow him to oversee classified intelligence and inform policies on WMD issues.

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has offered Wolfowitz, a prime architect of the Iraq War, a position as chairman of the International Security Advisory Board, a prestigious State Department panel, according to two department sources who declined to be identified discussing personnel matters. The 18-member panel, which has access to highly classified intelligence, advises Rice on disarmament, nuclear proliferation, WMD issues and other matters. "We think he is well suited and will do an excellent job," said one senior official.

Former Deputy Defense Secretary, and member of Perle's Defense Policy Board, in the Pentagon. Wolfowitz is a close associate of Perle, and reportedly has close ties to the Israeli military. His sister lives in Israel. Wolfowitz came from the above mentioned Jewish thinktank, JINSA. Wolfowitz was the number two leader within the administration behind this Iraq war mongering. He later was appointed head of the World Bank but resigned under pressure from World Bank members over a scandal involving his misuse of power.

Lawrence (Larry) Franklin

The former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst with expertise in Iranian policy issues who worked in the office of Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and reported directly to Feith's deputy, William Luti, was sentenced January 20, 2006, "to more than 12 years in prison for giving classified information to an Israeli diplomat" and members of the pro-Israel lobbying group American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Franklin will "remain free while the government continues with the wider case" and his "prison time could be sharply reduced in return for his help in prosecuting" former AIPAC members Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman, [who] are scheduled to go on trial in April [2006]. Franklin admitted that he met periodically with Rosen and Weissman between 2002 and 2004 and discussed classified information, including information about potential attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq. Rosen and Weissman would later share what they learned with reporters and Israeli officials." (source: sourcewatch.com).

Douglas Feith

Under Secretary of Defense and Policy Advisor at the Pentagon. He is a close associate of Perle and served as his Special Counsel. Like Perle and the others, Feith is a pro-Israel extremist, who has advocated anti-Arab policies in the past. He is closely associated with the extremist group, the Zionist Organization of America, which even attacks Jews that don't agree with its extremist views. Feith frequently speaks at ZOA conferences. Feith runs a small law firm, Feith and Zell, which only has one International office, in Israel. The majority of their legal work is representing Israeli interests. His firm's own website stated, prior to his appointment, that Feith "represents Israeli Armaments Manufacturer." Feith basically represents the Israeli War Machine. Feith also came from the Jewish thinktank JINSA. Feith, like Perle and Wolfowitz, are campaigning hard for this Israeli proxy war against Iraq.

Feith was investigated by the FBI under suspicion of leaking classified information to Israel, being that he was Larry Franklin's boss when Franklin leaked those documents to Rosen and Weissman of AIPAC. For that he was forced to leave the National Security Council. Feith was also investigated by the Senate Intelligence Committee for sexing up 'intelligence' that was used to justify invading Iraq.

Edward Luttwak

Member of the National Security Study Group of the Department of Defence at the Pentagon. Luttwak is reportedly an Israeli citizen and has taught in Israel. He frequently writes for Israeli and pro-Israeli newspapers and journals. Luttwak is an Israeli extremist whose main theme in many of his articles is the necessity of the U.S. waging war against Iraq and Iran.

Henry Kissinger

One of many Pentagon Advisors, Kissinger sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle. For detailed information about Kissinger's evil past, read Seymour Hersch's book (Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House). Kissinger likely had a part in the Watergate crimes, Southeast Asia mass murders (Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos), Installing Chilean mass murdering dictator Pinochet, Operation Condor's mass killings in South America, and more recently served as Serbia's Ex-Dictator Slobodan Milosevic's Advisor. He consistently advocated going to war against Iraq. Kissinger is the Ariel Sharon of the U.S. Unfortunately, President Bush nominated Kissinger as chairman of the September 11 investigating commission. It's like picking a bank robber to investigate a fraud scandal. He later declined this job under enormous protests.

Dov Zakheim

Dov Zakheim is an ordained rabbi and reportedly holds Israeli citizenship. Zakheim attended Jew's College in London and became an ordained Orthodox Jewish Rabbi in 1973. He was adjunct professor at New York's Jewish Yeshiva University. Zakheim is close to the Israeli lobby.
Dov Zakheim is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and in 2000 a co-author of the Project for the New American Century's position paper, Rebuilding America's Defenses, advocating the necessity for a Pearl-Harbor-like incident to mobilize the country into war with its enemies, mostly Middle Eastern Muslim nations.

He was appointed by Bush as Pentagon Comptroller from May 4, 2001 to March 10, 2004. At that time he was unable to explain the disappearance of $1 trillion dollars. Actually, nearly three years earlier, Donald Rumsfeld announced on September 10, 2001 that an audit discovered $2.3 trillion was also missing from the Pentagon books. That story, as mentioned, was buried under 9-11's rubble. The two sums disappeared on Zakheim's watch. We can only guess where that cash went.

Despite these suspicions, on May 6, 2004, Zakheim took a lucrative position at Booz Allen Hamilton, one of the most prestigious strategy consulting firms in the world. One of its clients then was Blessed Relief, a charity said to be a front for Osama bin Laden. Booz, Allen & Hamilton then also worked closely with DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is the research arm of the Department of Defense.
Judicial Inc's bio of Dov tells us Zakheim is a dual Israeli/American citizen and has been tracking the halls of US government for 25 years, casting defense policy and influence on Presidents Reagan, Clinton, Bush Sr. and Bush Jr. Judicial Inc points out that most of Israel's armaments were gotten thanks to him. Squads of US F-16 and F-15 were classified military surplus and sold to Israel at a fraction of their value.

Kenneth Adelman

One of many Pentagon Advisors, Adelman also sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle, and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supported going to war against Iraq. Adelman frequently is a guest on Fox News, and often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. Through his racism or ignorance, he actually called Arabs "anti-Semitic" on Fox News (11/28/2001), when he could have looked it up in the dictionary to find out that Arabs by definition are Semites.

I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby

Vice President Dick Cheney's ex-Chief of Staff. As chief pro-Israel Jewish advisor to Cheney, it helps explains why Cheney is so gun-ho to invade Iran. Libby is longtime associate of Wolfowitz. Libby was also a lawyer for convicted felon and Israeli spy Marc Rich, whom Clinton pardoned, in his last days as president. Libby was recently found guilty of lying to Federal investigators in the Valerie Plame affair, in which Plame, a covert CIA agent, was exposed for political revenge by the Bush administration following her husband's revelations about the lies leading to the Iraq War.

Robert Satloff

U.S. National Security Council Advisor, Satloff was the executive director of the Israeli lobby's "think tank," Washington Institute for Near East Policy. Many of the Israeli lobby's "experts" come from this front group, like Martin Indyk.

Elliott Abrams

National Security Council Advisor. He previously worked at Washington-based "Think Tank" Ethics and Public Policy Center. During the Reagan Adminstration, Abrams was the Assistant Secretary of State, handling, for the most part, Latin American affairs. He played an important role in the Iran-Contra Scandal, which involved illegally selling U.S. weapons to Iran to fight Iraq, and illegally funding the contra rebels fighting to overthrow Nicaragua's Sandinista government. He also actively deceived three congressional committees about his involvement and thereby faced felony charges based on his testimony. Abrams pled guilty in 1991 to two misdemeanors and was sentenced to a year's probation and 100 hours of community service. A year later, former President Bush (Senior) granted Abrams a full pardon. He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Reagan Administration's State Department.

Marc Grossman

Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs. He was Director General of the Foreign Service and Director of Human Resources at the Department of State. Grossman is one of many of the pro-Israel Jewish officials from the Clinton Administration that Bush has promoted to higher posts.

Richard Haass

Director of Policy Planning at the State Department and Ambassador at large. He is also Director of National Security Programs and Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). He was one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the first Bush (Sr) Administration who sat on the National Security Council, and who consistently advocated going to war against Iraq. Haass is also a member of the Defense Department's National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.

Robert Zoellick

U.S. Trade Representative, a cabinet-level position. He is also one of the more hawkish pro-Israel Jews in the Bush (Jr) Administration who advocated invading Iraq and occupying a portion of the country in order to set up a Vichy-style puppet government. He consistently advocates going to war against Iran.

Ari Fleischer

Ex- White House Spokesman for the Bush (Jr) Administration. Prominent in the Jewish community, some reports state that he holds Israeli citizenship. Fleischer is closely connected to the extremist Jewish group called the Chabad Lubavitch Hasidics, who follow the Qabala, and hold very extremist and insulting views of non-Jews. Fleischer was the co-president of Chabad's Capitol Jewish Forum. He received the Young Leadership Award from the American Friends of Lubavitch in October, 2001.

James Schlesinger

One of many Pentagon Advisors, Schlesinger also sits on the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor, who supported going to war against Iraq. Schlesinger is also a commissioner of the Defense Department's National Security Study Group, at the Pentagon.

David Frum

White House speechwriter behind the "Axis of Evil" label. He lumped together all the lies and accusations against Iraq for Bush to justify the war.

Joshua Bolten

White House Deputy Chief of Staff, Bolten was previously a banker, former legislative aide, and prominent in the Jewish community.

John Bolton

Former UN Representative and Under-Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. Bolton is also a Senior Advisor to President Bush. Prior to this position, Bolton was Senior Vice President of the above mentioned pro-Israel thinktank, AEI. He recently (October 2002) accused Syria of having a nuclear program, so that they can attack Syria after Iraq. He must have forgotten that Israel has 400 nuclear warheads, some of which are thermonuclear weapons (according to a recent U.S. Air Force report).

David Wurmser

Special Assistant to John Bolton (above), the under-secretary for arms control and international security. Wurmser also worked at the AEI with Perle and Bolton. His wife, Meyrav Wurmser, along with Colonel Yigal Carmon, formerly of Israeli military intelligence, co-founded the Middle East Media Research Institute (Memri),a Washington-based Israeli outfit which distributes articles translated from Arabic newspapers portraying Arabs in a bad light.

Eliot Cohen

Member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board under Perle and is another extremist pro-Israel advisor. Like Adelman, he often expresses extremist and often ridiculus anti-Arab and anti-Muslim views. More recently, he wrote an opinion article in the Wall Street Journal openly admitting his rascist hatred of Islam claiming that Islam should be the enemy, not terrorism.

Mel Sembler

President of the Export-Import Bank of the United States. A Prominent Jewish Republican and Former National Finance Chairman of the Republican National Committee. The Export-Import Bank facilitates trade relationships between U.S. businesses and foreign countries, specifically those with financial problems. "

No wonder our polices resemble that of Israel. In fact, Richard Pearle led a study group for Israels Prime Minister Netanyahu in 1996, with assistance from Douglas Feith, that recommended in the report "Clean Break" removal of Saddam in Iraq (done), an armed incursion into Lebaonon (done), strikes against Syria (done) and Iran (pending). Mission almost accomplished.

I have nothing against dual nationals, but if you are working in the US government, you must be 100% loyal to America, and holding citizenship in another country can not be permitted. In fact, Americans will lose their citizenship if they take a policy level position in the government of another nation.

Lie We Must!

"(Reuters) - US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker said on Thursday there would be no secret deals..."

That's our government! First a lie then a half truth and finally they `fess up.

There's really nothing new here. It's just another way of showing that despite our claim that we are a democracy and want to spread democracy across the world, our actions say otherwise.

We have entered, by means of attack, and occupied their country free of the dictator Saddam Hussein in order that we may dictate what they can and can't do.

It goes on to illustrate what I have been saying all along. This is al-Dubya's country; he only allows al-Maliki and al-Sadr to play in it like the only kid in the neighborhood who has the sandbox.

As far as Bush's "pipe dream" that getting this agreement resolved before he leaves office to vindicate him and call this war a success, he's not looking at the world through rose colored glasses;' he's got blinders on.

You want vindication: bring back to life the almost 4,100 U. S. military lost there. Restore the God knows how many billions to our treasury that has been wasted there. Impossible, you say?
Yes, and as totally ridiculous as Mr. Bush's belief that he can be vindicated.

He has high hopes that his hand-picked successor John McCain will win in November and continue what has been the failed Bush/Cheney policy in Iraq (and spread it around Iran or wherever else we can bully our way). Should he get this agreement finalized, with or without the approval of the Iraqi government, he will be making it that much tougher for Obama should he be the one elected.

Didn't you love the part about U. S. contractors and how was it worded, something alluding to immunity from prosecution? That means Blackwater can continue killing as many innocent Iraqi citizens as they want and nobody can do a damn thing about it.

The saddest part of all is that no matter how much we bitch about it, nobody has been in a position to do anything about it (or those who have, namely our members of Congress, are too busy covering their own respective asses to do anything but issue "non-binding resolutions")

So let's go elect John McCain so we can have four more years of the same!

Bush--tar him, feather him and run him to The Hague on a rail.

Oh, and to david and all the rest of you bitching about what Obama said to AIPAC: Get over it, and stop confusing it with the iraq war. There are plenty of strongly pro-israel jews who recognize what the iraq war is all about, and to assume that Obama will nto change this policy because he supports israel is nonsense.

Obama has made it clear he will pull out of iraq, and if that doesn't include all of these huge bases, its not a pullout.

Secret? What's the secret I knew about this years ago!

Get ready for a hundred year occupation...

How many times did Obama emphatically repeat he'd do anything to protect Israel. I guess that includes bombing Iran if they look crosseyed at anyone. I'm tired of this love affair with Israel that the U.S. has. His words must have inflamed the people in the middle-east which won't lead to peace. But hey, war is profitable, right? At least for the war profiteers -- but not for us taxpayers. Who'd want that dirty, blood-soaked money anyway. Now that Obomber has dutifully kissed Israeli azz, he's in for sure. I don't see much difference between him, Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, etc. All right-wing hawks. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Only the public can fetter Big Money. We need the referendum here and now.

I dread to see just how many more surprises our lousy President has in store before the next election. Bush probably planned so many reprehensible actions years before he stole the Presidential election and I wouldn't be surprised if he plans in some treacherous manner to steal the next election and make Obama's election impossible. Bush's dirty tricks along with his cohorts makes me repeat my belief that what we have here is just another mad dog that wants to take over the world.

After Obama's speech to AIPAC there is only one solution. Everyone in the world must buy an American and Israeli flag, then learn to sing God Bless America and force themselves to eat McDonalds hamburgers and drink Coke.

I thought Obama might bring change but, sadly, it's just more of the same.

www.dangerouscreation.com

"But by perpetuating the US presence in Iraq, the long-term settlement would undercut pledges by the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, to withdraw US troops if he is elected president in November."

So very cute… NOT!

Poor Obama, he REALLY WANTS to end the war... but now he just can't…

Is anyone else tired of these boringly repetitive imperialist ploys?

"Bush wants to..."

Right, not the military contractors, not the DoD, not the Euro/American elite... but Bush!

It seems to me, that if all we are ever doing is setting the stage for imperialist wars (and terrorist scripts) to invest life with more and more police state controls... and this pattern NEVER misses a beat no matter who is in the White House... maybe the resident in the White House is immaterial.

Maybe the focus should be on who is writing the script that the White House denizen is reading and protecting from public scrutiny.

THIS BUSH ATTEMPT TO CIRCUMVENT LEGISLATIVE PROCESS IS OUTRAGEOUS! THIS MAN AND HIS COHORTS DESERVE NOTHING LESS THAN THE HARSHEST LEGAL TREATMENT AVAILABLE. I HAVE SENT THIS ARTICLE TO MSNBC AND CNN WITH LITTLE HOPE THOSE WHORES WILL DISCUSS ON AIR. NO SENSE WASTING ENERGY SENDING TO "FIXED NEWS". I AM SO FURIOUS THAT I'M SURE MY SUGAR HAS GONE OVER 200! HOW STUPID ARE AMERICANS TO ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN? TUNE IN TOMORROW TO FIND OUT!!!!!! GOD SAVE OUR WONDERFUL NATION FROM THESE TRAITORS!!!

This could be done without any debate or approval from congress?

"rocyahsoul June 5th, 2008 2:37 pm

"Yet Obama has much to learn…" — Jim Glover
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/93FE247B-452D-4022-8374-088D8704C1DE.htm "

THANKS FOR THAT AL JAZEERA link, Jim Glover. I'll be displeased by what it reveals, but it must be like his speech that was aired over CBC Radio last night and which I refer to as hellishly and frighteningly pro-Israel.

"You think Obomber doesn't know what he's doing? Now that he has the nomination in the bag, he's revealing himself, thus terrorizing the astute, Zionist propagandizing the general electorate and winking cutely at the zionists."

I HAD A FEELING that the CBC airing of his speech last night was an indication that he's ending his false acts and words, and due to having clinched the Dem. Party nomination.

"He's an agent of the most hideous government yet ruled. OBVIOUSLY. You'd have to be a complete moron to be fooled by this guy. He's a white guy in makeup. No black man has lips the color or dimension as Obomber the faker."

I'D REPHRASE that to say, "the most hideous government[s]", of both the U.S. and Israel.

AND AN ELITES' ['SLAVE'] is how Harry Belafonte correctly referred to such black Americans when he said this of Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice several years ago; I believe during Fall 2001, but maybe it was 2002 or even since then. His reasons are irrefutably and obviously right, imo; and they also apply to Barack Obama, imo. It's a good interview and not long.

Let's go, Barack. Now's the time to tell us you're *against* the War.

NOT!

But not to worry, Corporate America, Obama is well onboard. Your millions have made sure of his mercantile fealty. (NOTE: Obama in the primaries had more corporate money behind him than either Hillary or McCain -- with more on the way!)

Let's see just how people-oriented Obama is. How sincere he is about "change."

NOT!

Upwards of 65% of the American public want OUT of Iraq. Is Obama listening to that democratic majority, or rather to the corporate oligarchy the rest of the Democrats, and Republicans, supplicate themselves to?

You nominated him, liberal establishment, now let's see how much blood settles on his hands.

Still, not to worry, once Obama is elected, and nce a few more hundred thousands foreigners are slaughtered, once a few more third world countries are invade, once a few dozen more city-sized permanent military bases are built in the Middle East, and once a couple of Latin American governments are overthrown, then the liberals will, perhaps, finally see Obama for the corporate mouthpiece he truly is.

Then all the "cruise missile liberals" -- The Nation, Air America, Common Dreams, et al -- will go find themselves a *new* savior.

Who knows, Pat Buchanan may be a Democrat by then.

" Munich June 5th, 2008 1:35 pm

...

So we must now put the plan of Middle East hegemony into overdrive, build as many bases as possible so that we can .... ..."

Perhaps not "as many bases as possible", but evidently "as many as deemed to be strategically needed".

And the Middle East, besides Israel, that is, has NO plen of hegemony, so "the plan of Middle East hegemony" strikes me as really meant to be "the plan of hegemony towards the Middle East", the hegemony of the govts of the U.S. and its coalition allies. It's their plan of hegemony and damn pigheaded are they about implementing it.

===================================

" Jim Glover June 5th, 2008 1:57 pm

I just checked up on predictions of permanent bases in Iraq.

I am not so Sure.

Obama said:

Q. What would you do with the huge embassy that we've built?

A. Well, that raises a whole other set of questions.

Q. And the (military) bases.

A. I've been very clear we should not have permanent bases in Iraq.

Q. Would you leave the embassy?

A. We have to have an embassy, absolutely. Now the fact that we built this Xanadu in the middle of Baghdad, I would question the wisdom of that."

OBAMA WAS PERFORMING a mock interview with himself, providing both the Questions and Answers, or only the latter?

"From Obama's web site:

Bringing Our Troops Home
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda."

IT'S NOT WHAT Obama's previously stated; he was quoted and by people I believe to be truthful as having said that military bases would be needed for protecting the criminally established U.S. embassy, which Obama's damn wrong about the U.S. having any real need for there. He added that this need to maintain bases there will be needed for the ground and air forces his presidency would treat as needed there for protecting the embassy and possibly for training Iraqi forces, as well as maybe for providing so-called "security" there.

Assuming that the people who quoted him saying this are or were accurate, then what his campaign website presently states for policy is seriously different, really a considerably strong contrast; and there's no intelligent and responsible justification for such flippant changes in or over such a short time-frame.

His presidency might not build more bases, as he states he wouldn't, but that's specifically about constructing more; nothing related to those already constructed or existing.

I think people like at FPIF.org and TomDispatch.com ,f.e., are better resource providers on this and other topics about this war on Iraq, as well as the one on Afghanistan. And I don't know whether it was censored in the U.S., but I overheard a speech by him last night on CBC Radio and he was hellishly and frighteningly pro-Israel. That, by itself, is a strong indication that I definitely can't trust him.

I provided some links for the latter in one of my above posts; the second one, I think. One's by Tom Engelhardt, and either in the same post or perhaps the first one, there's a link to an article by Stephen Lendman on Nader vs Obama and so on, while another article is by Bill Quigley, posted here at CD, and very good to read in terms of what this whole page is about. Engelhardt's and Quigley's article make it seriously clear that we can be very certain that Obama's not going to likely withdraw the U.S. from Iraq. Quigley may not specifically say the latter, but it's still and very inferred in the history he provided here.

I doubt Obama's going to do what's right about the war on Iraq and the long permanency of it, and I don't accept his double-talk, as well as his fiendish pro-Israel support. If he was a respectable law expert, then he'd know full well that many Israeli leaders, political and military, should be tried at the international court.

The illegitimacy of the US invasion of Iraq was well established before it even happened. When the US failed to find WMDs and Al Qaeda ties the illegitimacy of its invasion/occupation further solidified. And after the deaths of 1.2 million Iraqis, millions more gravely injured, millions displaced, over half the population jobless, and the whole population traumatized and burdended with poor sanitation, healthcare and security for many years and counting, the illegitimacy of the occupation grew to monumental proportions. Now add to all that the $3 to $7 trillion burden on the American people, and whatta ya got?

No, they're not permanent bases says the US. And they are not really bases and we really don't have troops in Iraq and we're not really interested in occupying Iraq and controlling your oil.

If you think we're out to control you, you just don't know how good we really are.

RE:QuakerDave
"As to how we're going to pay for it, we already are. $5 billion a week, last I heard, Where's THAT money coming from?"

CHINA. Your grandkids' and their kids will be slaves in the truer sense of the word than our current status as wage slaves in this country.

The U.S. government has admitted it made a "mistake" because of "flawed intelligence" (hehe) when it attacked Iraq.

So isn't it logical to expect them to LEAVE Iraq because they made a "mistake?" That's what we're supposed to do as soon as we realize that a "mistake" was made, isn't it? We do all we can to rectify it and reverse it.

Why is the U.S. still in Iraq, and why is it planning to occupy Iraq indefinitely? Oh I forgot, it's all about the oil. Of course the U.S. is going to stay there, all the while blaming their "mistake" on "flawed intelligence."

If only the average American on the street knew the true aims of this Administration, this Bozo would be impeached already. The comedy-tragedy saga, sadly continues....

abridged staying sane in an insane world-

that's why ...were so happy to vote...they were merely jubilant at gaining control of their country....how naive some of them were.

Yeah, how naive of those silly purple-fingered Iraqis to believe that voting would change the power structure of their country.

I sure am glad I live in America, where no one is stupid enough to hope that voting can make a change.

This is what the original plan was for Iraq anyway. It has always been the plan. Huge embassy, huge presence, many military bases. The Cheney Energy Task Force spent a lot of time looking over maps of Iraqi oilfields. The plan was to effectively annex those huge reserves to replace the depleted domestic reserves. How could we remain a great power without control of major petroleum reserves when petroleum, for better or worse, is the vital lifeblood of modern economies? The American people have been fooled into this neo-imperial misadventure. To this day Cheney and Bush fight any effort to reveal the details of what happened in the Cheney Energy Task Force meetings, but it is known that Iraq was a major focus.

and another day goes by full of passionate discussion about this or that, but with not an iota of slowing in the worldwide cycle of industry, consumption and waste...unless you have the money to rival big business or the weaponry and manpower to rival the military or Blackwaterboard, there's not much left to do in the sold-the-shop political arena...the only remaining way to make a statement is to change the way one lives...to stop behaving the way one has always behaved...if what they want more than anything is for one to go shopping, then stop shopping for anything not absolutely necessary...stop using all but absolutely necessary electricity and fuel, and look to workarounds for those...encourage multi-generational, extended-family shared-expense living...develop and devote time to relationships and community and to interests not dependent upon energy, industry or technology...begin growing food for personal consumption, and eat less meat...advise others to do the same...relax, slow down, simplify...cut others some slack, and don't be so quick to condemn, criticize, criminalize...tough times are ahead, and we're going to need each other...change what you can, and God help us all...

I think the definition of empathy is wanting the same things for others that you want for yourself. Therefore, I hope the Iraqis rise up in mass and kick us out on our asses, just as I hope we would rise up if another nation invaded the United States and tried to force such a one-sided "deal" on us. When I was a teen, I went and saw "Ghandi," and rooted for the Indians in their battle against British colonial oppression. Now we're the British. Go figure.

Site about Obama's "blue" lips.

www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1977055/posts

"Yet Obama has much to learn…" -- Jim Glover
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/93FE247B-452D-4022-8374-088D8704C1DE.htm

You think Obomber doesn't know what he's doing? Now that he has the nomination in the bag, he's revealing himself, thus terrorizing the astute, Zionist propagandizing the general electorate and winking cutely at the zionists.

He's an agent of the most hideous government yet ruled. OBVIOUSLY. You'd have to be a complete moron to be fooled by this guy. He's a white guy in makeup. No black man has lips the color or dimension as Obomber the faker.

Yet Obama has much to learn...
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/93FE247B-452D-4022-8374-088D8704C1DE.htm

"legal immunity for all American soldiers and contractors"

Swell, weekend safaris at the Emperial Palace, Baghdad, with live fire training on real Iraqi women and children. What a Prince of an idea.

I just checked up on predictions of permanent bases in Iraq.

I am not so Sure.

Obama said:

Q. What would you do with the huge embassy that we've built?

A. Well, that raises a whole other set of questions.

Q. And the (military) bases.

A. I've been very clear we should not have permanent bases in Iraq.

Q. Would you leave the embassy?

A. We have to have an embassy, absolutely. Now the fact that we built this Xanadu in the middle of Baghdad, I would question the wisdom of that.
--------------
From Obama's web site:

Bringing Our Troops Home
Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq. He will keep some troops in Iraq to protect our embassy and diplomats; if al Qaeda attempts to build a base within Iraq, he will keep troops in Iraq or elsewhere in the region to carry out targeted strikes on al Qaeda.
Press Iraq's Leaders to Reconcile
The best way to press Iraq's leaders to take responsibility for their future is to make it clear that we are leaving. As we remove our troops, Obama will engage representatives from all levels of Iraqi society – in and out of government – to seek a new accord on Iraq's Constitution and governance. The United Nations will play a central role in this convention, which should not adjourn until a new national accord is reached addressing tough questions like federalism and oil revenue-sharing.
Regional Diplomacy
Obama will launch the most aggressive diplomatic effort in recent American history to reach a new compact on the stability of Iraq and the Middle East. This effort will include all of Iraq's neighbors — including Iran and Syria. This compact will aim to secure Iraq's borders; keep neighboring countries from meddling inside Iraq; isolate al Qaeda; support reconciliation among Iraq's sectarian groups; and provide financial support for Iraq's reconstruction.
Humanitarian Initiative
Obama believes that America has a moral and security responsibility to confront Iraq's humanitarian crisis — two million Iraqis are refugees; two million more are displaced inside their own country. Obama will form an international working group to address this crisis. He will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries, and ensure that Iraqis inside their own country can find a safe-haven.

Also

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080605/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_iraq

There is a global revolution happening, Well See.

Golly Gee June 5th, 2008 1:01 pm -- 'Arvy, you're so excited you're stuttering. [...] Probably this "plan" has been leaked by the lunatics [...] as a diversion.'

I have no adequate response for that kind of thinking. I can only say that it's a 'diversion' that seems to have a lot of Iraqis stuttering as well.

Why couldn't the new US President simply cancel whatever treaty that GWB enters into? That's what Bush did when it was inconvenient for him to adhere to the law. As far as UI am concerned, the entire bush/cheney crime family administration was illegal from the getgo and should be annulled while they are made to appear before the International Court and answer for their crimes against humanity.

There'll be no permanent military bases in Iraq. Isn't that what we were all told? Guess what! They lied again. I hate when that happens. Tyranny and fascism sucks.

And what about all of the money China lent us so that we could wage these illegal oil wars? It has to be paid back doesn't it? Pay backs are indeed a bitch. We've borrowed how much money from them?

So we must now put the plan of Middle East hegemony into overdrive, build as many bases as possible so that we can eventually fight of the evil doers so that we can dictate oil policy to China. That's the plan. Brilliant isn't it?

But wait! What about Iran? They'll be in the way of this pernicious plan. No problem, they're listed as part of the axis of evil and must be dealt with accordingly. They'll have to, especially if we're going to control all of the black gold.

Ladies and gentleman, your vote no longer matters and this Orwellian horror show isn't yet over. Mean while America, (this land is your land, this land in my land) continues to crumble right before our very eyes. As we sink deeper and deeper into this contrived morass. ( part of that same pernicious plan)

And if you think Barack (Hussein) Obama or John (insane) McCain is going to make things all better? I don't think so.

We're going to have to resolve this matter on our own.

The Boys from Brazil are moving to the Mideast with Blackwater as the SS.

Patrick Cockburn doesn't seem to have done enough homework reading of Obama's campaign policies or pledges.

Quote: "But by perpetuating the US presence in Iraq, the long-term settlement would undercut pledges by the Democratic presidential nominee, Barack Obama, to withdraw US troops if he is elected president in November.

The timing of the agreement would also boost the Republican candidate, John McCain, who has claimed the United States is on the verge of victory in Iraq - a victory that he says Mr Obama would throw away by a premature military withdrawal."

MCCAIN LIKELY enough says that, but Obama has not stated that he'll see to the U.S. withdrawing from Iraq. His words were a messed up statement, for he contradicted himself. After all, he explicitly emphasized that he'd maintain the criminally established U.S. embassy and military bases in Iraq, and added that this will require the maintenance of U.S. troops there; only having stated, in true lying manner, that his presidency could supposedly reduce the number of troops. If he should be elected president and withdraw some troops, then the U.S. still will have a major criminal force in Iraq; especially when we do not neglect to include the count of mercenary contractors.

He said nothing indicating any true intentions of reversing any really significant part of the whole crime that the invasion of and war upon Iraq has always been. He promised the contrary, only he thinks he can fool us all with his so-called sophisticated wording; speaking out of both sides of his mouth at the same time and this being a jumbled mess of self-contradictions and so-called understanding of LAW.

He's speaking better now with respect to Iran, but I overheard him on late-night CBC radio last night and I don't know if the words I'm referring to have been censored in the USA and by U.S. "news" media, but his words hellishly are pro-Israel, which is the only international criminal and threat in the Middle East; the only state there to be maker of wars of aggression, and Israel's other extreme crimes against other peoples and govts of the M.E.

Obama's law degree? Now that's a piece of paper that can legitimately be treated as just junk paper; while NOT the U.S. Constitution and the U.S. Bill of Rights, which he clearly needs to really [learn]. Someone must've paid for his degree paper, because he's NO law expert; or certainly not a respectable and credible one anyway. Rev. Jeremiah Wright should serve Obama a little lesson in real law and give Obama the boot out of the door of their local, parish church.

Obama's no peace- and justice-maker, he promises to maintain the criminal U.S. embassy, military bases, and therefore domination (attempted domination, but damn crushingly so, too), by inherent implication.

The following should be of far greater illustration of who is fit to be elected U.S. president in November.

"Choice in November - Nader v. Twiddle Dee or Twiddle Dum

by Stephen Lendman

Global Research, June 4, 2008"

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=9182

Nader, Cynthia McKinney, Mike Gravel, and Dennis Kucinich; but too few Americans truly want a really just govt.

Operation Iraqi Freedom
Operation Iraqi Liberation
Total United States Dominance

If the Iraqis agree to this criminal act, they will become the ragheads, the hajis, the dirty little Arabs that the American government, the American military, and the corporate heads already see them as. They become slaves, and Americans once again, having learned nothing, become slavemasters. And the American people will deservedly become objects of contempt and disgust around the world, as well as targets wherever they travel.

I wonder how many here who predict Obama will be shot or McSame is gonna win will actually do anything to help prevent that or do they really want that?

QuakerDave June 5th, 2008 12:59 pm.....That money is coming out of the earnings of your grandkids and their grandkids via a debt based currency and loans from the Chinese, Saudis and lawd knows who else. We are all indentured slaves. Sooner or later THAT reality will hit!

If the U.S. authorizes this hellbent crime and on top of the crime that the whole war's been since Fall 2002, actually earlier in 2002, with the 2002-"preparatory" U.S. (and UK ?) aerial bombings to destroy more of Iraq's defence means before the West would launch the official invasion, then the U.S. govt should honestly establish a new and international award, for awarding to the govt that is the most [hell]bent of all. After all, there's no mature point in or to trying to deny obvious realities anyway.

The Congress usually, if not always, authorizes more war funding than the Bush-Cheney cabal demand, so I wonder what the Congress will really decide this time around; that this secret pact also could be augmented, enhanced, "beefed up" more?.

Between the Congress and the Senate, there are many war-crimes profiteers.

So many here still talk about Bush like he is gonna dominate the world forever....

there is a global Revolution happening...check out.
---------------

"Diplomacy thriving, but without U.S.

The fall election and an era of diffused power may be factors.

By Howard LaFranchi | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
from the June 3, 2008 edition

Washington - Just this spring, a number of diplomatic initiatives and conflict-settlement discussions are taking place without the United States, raising questions about the reach and strength of American global power.

The world may be simply witnessing a lull in US diplomatic results until voters pick a replacement for George W. Bush – a particularly unpopular American president on the international stage. But another reason could be at work: Is this the waning of American primacy and the dawn of an era of diffused power?

Consider these developments:

•Fierce fighting that threatened to engulf Lebanon in a new civil war last month was quelled when factions reached a political accord with the help of Qatar – though with the US nowhere in sight.

•Israel and Syria have begun talks aimed at reaching a peace treaty – with Turkey as the go-between.

•Brazil, looking for partners with which to expand its diplomatic reach, suddenly finds China eclipsing the US – particularly in food trade.

In these and other examples, both the US election and the dawn of a new era – one with diffused power – are probably both factors, many analysts say.

"There's an enormous amount of diplomatic activity and geopolitical movement taking place without US participation. Much of this is new, and it's striking," says Charles Kupchan, an international-relations expert at Georgetown University in Washington. "Part of it is the world taking steps on its own as the US focuses on its changing of the guard. But certainly a crucial factor is the world's changing balance of power."

This "changing balance" is causing a shift to new words to describe how the world will work in the post-Iraq-war, globalized era. Gone is the first Bush term's vision of unipolarity. And while some experts speak of an emerging multipolarity, Council on Foreign Relations president Richard Haass goes so far as to envision an era of "nonpolarity" where no power will dominate.

For some experts, focus on the US presidential campaign and a half-decade preoccupation with Iraq are two factors pulling the US away from broader involvement in the world – while also obscuring the larger changes in global power distribution.

"We are seeing a diffusion of power to other actors," says Thomas Henriksen, an American foreign-policy expert at the Hoover Institution in Stanford, Calif. "But there are other things going on that make it hard to know if it's a major trend."

President Bush's unpopularity in the Middle East may be one explanation for diplomatic efforts such as those in Lebanon and between Israel and Syria moving ahead without the US, he says. A US overstretch in Iraq is another reason that others list.

Mr. Kupchan of Georgetown cites what he calls "mutually reinforcing explanations" for a world stage where the US is not playing the lead role.

First, "The clock is running out on the Bush administration," he says. That encourages others to try to solve problems without the US, especially in a regional context.

Second, a global shift in the distribution of power has de-emphasized American primacy. "The US is still No. 1," Kupchan says, "but globalization, the price of oil, a tanking US economy, all have joined to accelerate a dramatic shift of power towards China, the world's energy producers, and certain regional powers."

Third, he says, the post-cold-war assumption that the West's democracies "led the pack" is being challenged by the rising influence of countries such as China, Russia, and even Iran, which have a different vision for the exercise of global power. "Countries that are performing well economically or that hold a key to global prosperity are able to hold sway the way they couldn't before," Kupchan says.

This vision of the waning primacy of Western democratic ideals is developed by international-relations expert Robert Kagan in his recent book, "The Return of History and the End of Dreams." In it, he foresees a return to an era of competition for spheres of influence.

But that vision paints too dark a picture of the future, some experts say.

Mr. Henriksen of the Hoover Institution notes, for example, that China has played a crucial role in the US-led effort to shut down North Korea's nuclear program.

"Nonproliferation is on everyone's list of the top international challenges that lie ahead," he says. "And this is a case where we couldn't have got where we have without the Chinese."

That example is one leading some experts to suggest a dawning "era of opportunity" for the US to join a more equal and like-minded world in addressing what they see as key challenges: terrorism and nonproliferation, the threat of pandemic disease, and global warming.

"When it comes to the two or three issues that really matter, we actually have much more in common than we ever have" with other world powers, says Nina Hachigian, a visiting scholar at Stanford University's Center for International Security and Cooperation.

China and Russia are working closely with the US on proliferation and other security issues in ways that suggest how the US can benefit from an era of more equal world powers, says Ms. Hachigian, coauthor with Mona Sutphen of "The Next American Century: How the U.S. Can Thrive as Other Powers Rise."

She notes that the current "hand-wringing" over China's rise is reminiscent of similar consternation over Japan in the 1980s. "Now, as then, we can get worked up about other countries having power," she says, "or we can focus on the opportunities this new era presents."

Another example is Russia, she says: With Russia a key player in international weapons security efforts and in negotiations with Iran, "it doesn't make sense to talk in terms of minimizing engagement with the Russians, as in kicking them out of the G-8."

But it will take two changes for the US to take advantage of this "new era," she says: first, a US that no longer sees global power in the "zero-sum" terms of the cold-war era and second, an America that remains strong economically and diplomatically by investing more in education, infrastructure, and sciences at home."

Arvy: "Dismissing the the string pullers as lunatics is your first mistake...And, if you truly believe that none of their plans are going anywhere just because of some new faces moving into the front office, you'll believe anything."

Arvy, you're so excited you're stuttering.

Nowhere did I say anything about "new faces." The Dems have been enablers all along.

Probably this "plan" has been leaked by the lunatics (and yes, again, they are lunatics in so far at they live in a reality of their own making) as a diversion. In an election year it's meant to give the impression they have some idea of what they're doing, that they know where they are going, and something recognizable as "success" is possible.

But they don't know what they're doing and never have. This has been an ad hoc, seat-of-the-pants screw-up from the beginning.

When things fall apart, as they already are, the evil bozos can wring their hands and say "if only everyone had hung tough and followed our plan..."

The wheels are coming off, not because of the Dems, but due to forces beyond U.S. control, so this plan isn't going anywhere beyond setting the stage for blaming others for their own folly.

You can almost hear them saying in years to come "We failed because Americans weren't worthy of our genius..."

Delusional to the end.

> What sort of minds could come up with this ANTIDEMOCRATIC idea??

This is what they had in mind all along. Why does this shock or suprise anyone?

As to how we're going to pay for it, we already are. $5 billion a week, last I heard, Where's THAT money coming from?

The Bush WH does not have to define "winning," for they only have to say that they have "won." With this gov't one only has to say something to define a certain reality. They pump money into the propaganda machine, & the machine spews the puke & fecal matter, & the Americans eat the puke & feces; so in the eyes of the Bush WH they have "won." From that point they can propel the next dictator into the White House. The same tricks they pulled in 2000 & 2004 will be used this year, so do not think that Obama has a chance at the White House. If he is not shot, the election fraud will be perpetuated upon the public. McCain will "win" just like we are winning in Iraq.
Pull out your money from the bank this week. I was w/ Wells Fargo; I quit. I was w/ ATT; I quit. Home Depot is in the Green Zone; I shop there less 'n less 'n less (tough to do while in the construction trades). Even though Starbucks has good coffee, I shop there less 'n less, perhaps twice a month now as opposed to several times a week. Each week, bit by bit, I keep my money closer.

At this point, I don't see what "winning the war" would give us. What is won? We have the oil, we have killed a million civilians, we've destroyed the infrastructure, everyone is afraid, do we need a plaque or something? We could just declare we won already, or maybe we should ask if they give up, so we can leave.

JackCD June 5th, 2008 12:27 pm

Am I missing something here?

You seem to miss alot!

Hummmm....no mention in this how the oil reserves are to be handled. I remember reading recently that they were opening up the bidding for the Big Oil regulars, but I'd imagine that there has to be some inclusion of that in this plan. One thing is for sure, once word gets out on this, this summer is sure to see an escalation in fighting.

the asshole in chief may think that any treaty negotiated by them is the last word, however, they do not have the constitutional authority, which hopefully will still be in effect when they're gone (to jail, I hope). Corporate media has covered a really vanilla version of this story, leaving out the really pertinent details of course (though maybe they're buried on page 56 somewhere. I sent the first paragraph to my congressional and senate reps, hoping for something (a fairytale, I know)....

Try this: Maybe Iraq should be hung around America's neck like a dead albatross. Maybe the agreement should stipulate that no matter how much it stinks and bleeds and shames us, no matter how we long to be rid of it, we will not be permitted to leave. We should be required to stick with our tar babies. Iraq, after all, is our new West Berlin - a showplace to the world of what happens when America reinvents your society for you.

It is all of America which permitted this disaster to happen. Should we now simply be able to change administrations and walk away from it, declaring that it was not ourselves but some deluded, now deposed guys who created the mess? For the sake of the Iraqis I hope we are able to get out. For ourselves I fear that, like a dog that cannot be taught not to kill chickens, we have gotten off to easily to learn our lesson.

civil behavior June 5th, 2008 9:20 am ….Withdrawing money from the banks is a good idea. It does not matter how LITTLE YOU have..it's a question of how many folks are willing to participate..NUMBERS is what scares them! They will try to frighten you off saying there are all sorts of forms to fill out, but that's the banks problem, not ours. They must fill out some form for withdrawals over $10K..big deal. If citizens wish to change this country, there must be some inconvenience and consequences. Change does not happen magically, it's REALITY and takes effort…sometimes blood…ask the Bolivians. willybill June 5th, 2008 11:02 am

I enquired at the local bank on how much cash I could withdraw at one time.
They said I could get $25,000 and any more than that they would have to order the money from the Federal Reserve which may take a few days.

So it appears it would not take too many people to withdraw funds to make a difference.

This is all about helping his corporate buddies to the US Treasury - Business as usual - Impeach him now - that should keep him busy till McCain steals the election.

And now, again, the U.S. is setting up a totalitarian regime in a foreign country.

Which banks are funding the contractors & subcontractors of the companies engaged in the pillaging of Iraq? Identify those banks, withdraw your money, deposit your money into a credit union that isn't involved in the pillaging. There are many credit unions entangled w/ the military complex; don't use them.
Which companies are contractors & subcontractors in Iraq? Which companies have a presence in the Green Zone in Baghdad? Starbucks? Home Depot? Walmart? McDonald's?
Burger King? Don't use them. Don't give them your money.
Keep your money. Spend it locally.

Am I missing something here? As written these claims of a secret plan could easily be a complete fabrication by a propagandist, or even a right-wing scheme to make Progressives look like paranoid fools. Without credible sources or evidence this story will laughed off by Conservatives. Lets see some backup before running it up the flagpole.

This bullshit will never fly because eventually the Iraqis will throw us out. It's inevitable. They're not going to become the Puerto Rico of the ME. By that time, we will probably be happy to go because the debt incurred in this exercise in Imperialism 1A will have ruined us.

NateW June 5th, 2008 11:40 am...Nothing can stop Obama or MickUltra. During those town meetings, we must DEMAND what the shrub and Vader have done be UNDONE. Whosoever puts that PROMISE IN WRITING is the candidate who gets elected. We the People have the POWER. Will we claim it and use it or continue to be the sheeple?? PUT IT IN WRITING. NO MORE SHALLOW CAMPAIGN PROMISES. HOLD THEM TO IT!!

AMERICA DID NOT OFFER THE IRAQIS ELECTIONS

tlcs_3 wrote: "...Didn't we put in a new democratic government?"

This misconception has to end, but it won't! Iraqis DEMANDED elections. Over 100,000 of them took to the streets and PROTESTED for elections. "YES, YES TO ELECTIONS! NO, NO TO SELECTION! NO, NO TO OCCUPATION! NO, NO TO AMERICA!" was their chant.

Bush wanted to keep control of Iraq, but Iraqis were becoming increasingly restless. Even after the elections, however, Paul Bremer's 100 orders for pillaging Iraq remained.

Violence flared in 2004, and America, for the first time, heeded the Iraqi people, offering them a national election, long before it wanted to.

"100,000 demand Iraqi elections":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jan/19/iraq

"Of course the White House fears free elections in Iraq":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/jan/24/usa.iraq1

That's why Iraqis were so happy to vote. They weren't thankful to America for offering them this opportunity - for it wasn't offered to them! - they were merely jubilant at the prospect of gaining control of their country and kicking America out.

How naive some of them were.

I think are we beginning to be able to define the what we are dealing with here, in one phase.
The military industrial congressional Wall street media complex.
Just about covers it.
But then again, it does leave out stinking lousy liars!

A contract signed under duress has no validity. So long as the US is occupying Iraq, such an agreement on the part of in Iraqi government will have no legitimacy.

I think it will take more than Obama to clean up the mess. It most likely will take decades, if not, generations.