November, 18 2008, 02:57pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Sam Husseini, (202) 347-0020; or David Zupan, (541) 484-9167
Anti-War Candidate, Pro-War Cabinet?
WASHINGTON
"I don't want to just end the war; I want to end the mindset that got us into war."
-- Barack Obama
Feb. 19, 2008
ROBERT PARRY
Parry is editor of ConsortiumNews.com, a reader-supported investigative webpage. His recent pieces include "The Danger of Keeping Robert Gates" and "Obama Risks Clinton-Era Mistakes," which states: "After a masterful campaign, Barack Obama seems headed toward some fateful mistakes as he assembles his administration by heeding the advice of Washington's Democratic insider community, a collective group that represents little 'change you can believe in.' ..."
Parry's books include Neck Deep: The Disastrous Presidency of George W. Bush, written with two of his sons, Sam and Nat. Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek.
ROBERT NAIMAN
Naiman is senior policy analyst and national coordinator at Just Foreign Policy. He recently wrote the piece "For Middle East Peace, Dennis Ross Is Not the Change We Seek."
STEPHEN ZUNES
Professor of politics at the University of San Francisco and a contributor to Foreign Policy in Focus, Zunes has written numerous pieces on Obama's foreign policy.
More Information
SAM HUSSEINI
Communications director of the Institute for Public Accuracy, Husseini said today: "'Diversity' is now often being twisted into a euphemism for Obama including Republicans in his Cabinet. While Obama repeatedly referenced his 2002 speech against the invasion of Iraq during the campaign as evidence of the flawed judgment of others, he is now reportedly considering numerous individuals who supported the invasion and/or made false claims about Iraq to fill high-level foreign policy positions.
"In fact, it looks like there will be little diversity on this critical count. Obama has already chosen Biden, who voted for war and enabled it in many ways, and Rahm Emanuel, who pushed for it. Meanwhile, 23 senators and 133 House members who voted against the war -- and countless other notable individuals who spoke out against it and the dubious claims leading to war -- are apparently not even being considered for these crucial positions."
More Information
Background: Here are some claims by named and possible officials in an Obama administration:
JOSEPH BIDEN: Voted in 2002 to authorize the invasion of Iraq. In his floor speech at the time he claimed: "[Saddam Hussein] possesses chemical and biological weapons and is seeking nuclear weapons." As then-chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he oversaw hearings which excluded former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter and other individuals who where highly critical of claims regarding Iraq's alleged possessions of weapons of mass destruction. See: "Biden: What Kind of Foreign Policy 'Experience'?"
HILLARY CLINTON: Voted for the 2002 authorization for the Iraq war. In her 2002 floor speech, she stated that "intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program." (Oct. 10, 2002)
RICHARD HOLBROOKE: Was ambassador to the United Nations toward the end of the Clinton administration. Claimed shortly after Colin Powell's speech to the UN: "It was a masterful job of diplomacy by Colin Powell and his colleagues, and it does not require a second vote to go to war. ... Saddam is the most dangerous government leader in the world today, he poses a threat to the region, he could pose a larger threat if he got weapons of mass destruction deployed, and we have a legitimate right to take action." (MSNBC, Jan. 23, 2003)
DENNIS ROSS: Mideast envoy during the Clinton administration, he made numerous appearances on Fox News Channel during the build-up for the Iraq invasion pressing for war, for example: "And the fact is that [Hussein] felt he was able to continue to pursue weapons of mass destruction, even while all of the resolutions demanding his disarmament were put into play, and you had inspectors on the ground." (Fox News Channel, Dec. 22, 2002)
JOHN KERRY: Voted for the 2002 authorization for the Iraq war. Stated at the time: "Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try? ... According to intelligence, Iraq has chemical and biological weapons ... Iraq is developing unmanned aerial vehicles capable of delivering chemical and biological warfare agents..." (Oct. 9, 2002)
SUSAN RICE: Assistant secretary of state in the Clinton administration. Before the invasion of Iraq, she claimed: "I think he [then Secretary of State Colin Powell] has proved that Iraq has these weapons and is hiding them, and I don't think many informed people doubted that." (NPR, Feb. 6, 2003)
BILL RICHARDSON: Was ambassador to the United Nations during the Clinton administration in the late 1990s during which time he claimed Iraq was developing weapons of mass destruction: "We think this man is a threat to the international community, and he threatens a lot of the neighbors in his region and future generations there with anthrax and VX." (Feb. 11, 1998)
A nationwide consortium, the Institute for Public Accuracy (IPA) represents an unprecedented effort to bring other voices to the mass-media table often dominated by a few major think tanks. IPA works to broaden public discourse in mainstream media, while building communication with alternative media outlets and grassroots activists.
LATEST NEWS
'Disgraceful Act of Complicity': Indian Left Denounces Modi's Israel Visit
"Modi's embrace of Zionist Israel amidst its relentless genocidal assault on Palestine is a betrayal of India's anti-colonial legacy," said one leftist leader.
Feb 25, 2026
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's arrival in Israel on Wednesday sparked widespread condemnation among his country's leftists, many of whom accused the Hindu nationalist leader of complicity in Israel's annihilation of Gaza.
Modi was warmly welcomed at Ben-Gurion International Airport by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife Sara to kick off a two-day state visit that is expected to focus on issues including military cooperation and arms sales, as Indian purchases of Israeli weaponry have increased exponentially in recent years.
The Indian leader was also joyously greeted at his place of accommodation, the King David Hotel, where in 1946 Jewish militants seeking independence from British occupation carried out a bombing that killed 91 people, including at least 15 Jews.
Modi addressed the Israeli Knesset, or Parliament, lamenting the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023 in which 1,195 Israelis and others were killed and 251 abducted. But he said nothing about the more than 250,000 Palestinians killed or wounded by Israel's genocidal retaliation.
"Modi endorsed the brutal killing of 71,000 innocent Palestinians from reckless Israeli bombing," Calcutta-based journalist Seema Sengupta said on social media in response to the Knesset speech. "The death on both sides should've been mourned by him. Instead, he sounded like a partisan leader of a party which gained prominence through disharmony, violence, and bloodshed."
The Communist Party of India-Marxist (CPI-M)—which leads the ruling Left Democratic Front that currently heads the Kerala state government—said it "strongly opposes" Modi's visit, which it called "a betrayal of the Palestinian cause" that "legitimizes the murderous Netanyahu regime."
"The visit comes at a juncture when Israel has been waging a genocidal war in Gaza," the party continued. "Despite a ceasefire, there are daily violations by Israel which conducts strikes killing scores of Palestinians. In the occupied West Bank, there are stepped up attacks on Palestinians and a spurt in illegal settlements."
"The declared intent of the visit is also to deepen strategic, military, and economic ties with a Zionist expansionist regime which seeks to dominate the region with the help of the United States," CPI-M added. "The visit is all the more inopportune because it is taking place at a time when the United States is preparing to attack Iran militarily at the instigation of Israel."
CPI-M General Secretary M A Baby said that "Modi's embrace of Zionist Israel amidst its relentless genocidal assault on Palestine is a betrayal of India's anti-colonial legacy."
The Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation, whose stronghold is in the eastern state of Bihar, said that it "condemns Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Israel as a disgraceful act of complicity in the ongoing genocidal assault on the Palestinian people."
"At a time when Palestinian civilians are being massacred, displaced, and starved under a brutal Israeli occupation, this visit amounts to political endorsement and profiteering on Palestinian blood," CPI (ML) Liberation continued. "After mortgaging India’s sovereignty and strategic autonomy to [US President Donald] Trump's racist agenda, Modi is now completely surrendering India’s historic legacy of anti-colonialism and solidarity with the oppressed by visiting Israel."
"Since assuming office in 2014, the Modi regime has systematically imported Israeli models of repression to consolidate its own politics of hate at home," the party added. "From bulldozer demolitions and collective punishment tactics against minorities and marginalized, to the expansion of illegal surveillance infrastructures, the [Bharatiya Janata Party]’s fascist politics has found a role model in Israel."
Israel and India have deepened ties since Modi and the BJP were elected over a decade ago. Both Modi and Netanyahu are right-wing nationalists who utilize religious supremacism to exclude or marginalize Muslims, and both have been accused of increasing authoritarianism, just like their common ally Trump.
Center-leftists including members of the opposition Indian National Congress—which has been criticized for its "pragmatic" engagement with Israel—also condemned Modi's visit.
Left-leaning members of Indian civil society and academia also decried the visit.
Rebuffing Modi's claim that this week's shirtless anti-BJP demonstrations by members of the Indian Youth Congress were an embarrassment for the nation, Delhi School of Economics professor Nandini Sundar said on social media that visiting "genocide-committing Israel has embarrassed and shamed Indians more than a 1,000 shirtless protests."
The activist group Indian People in Solidarity With Palestine and the India chapter of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement issued a joint statement accusing the "fascist BJP government" of working "hands-in-gloves with genocidal Israel" to "suppress voices of dissent while maintaining a facade of being democratic."

“At a time when the ceasefire is being used as an excuse to bomb and vaporize Palestinians and occupy Gaza," the groups said, "the Indian government is choosing to stand with genocidal Israel and its imperialist masters like America and is working overtime to benefit the corporations from the occupation of Palestine."
Keep ReadingShow Less
‘Arsonist as Fire Chief’: Fed Appoints Wall Street Lobbyist to Key Bank Oversight Role
"There can be little doubt that having a Wall Street lawyer-lobbyist in charge of supervising and regulating his former Wall Street clients will likely result in a catastrophe for the American people."
Feb 25, 2026
The Federal Reserve board has quietly appointed a prominent Wall Street lawyer and lobbyist as the central bank's director of supervision and regulation, a move that one critic said was worse than "putting the fox in charge of the henhouse."
"This is like appointing a lifelong arsonist as a fire chief," Dennis Kelleher, president and CEO of Better Markets, said in response to the Fed's decision to put Randall Guynn in a position to regulate the industry he has long represented.
Politico reported Tuesday that "Guynn, a prominent Wall Street lawyer, will become the next director of supervision and regulation at the Federal Reserve, effective March 8."
Before joining Fed staff last year as an adviser to the central bank's vice chair for supervision, Guynn worked for close to four decades at the corporate law firm Davis Polk & Wardwell, where he recently chaired the company's Financial Institutions Group. According to Guynn's bio, he has "focused on advising banks of all sizes on their most critical financial regulatory issues and transactions."
Reuters, which first reported earlier this month that the Fed was expected to appoint Guynn to the bank policing role, noted that the decision "would mark a departure for the central bank, which since at least 1977 has filled the job with long-serving Fed career staff."
"The only reasonable expectation is that his leadership of Fed supervision and regulation will accelerate the Fed’s current push to implement policies that favor the biggest, most dangerous banks."
In a statement, Kelleher of Better Markets described Guynn as a "lawyer-lobbyist" who has "spent his entire professional life—almost 40 years—zealously and exclusively representing the interests of the financial industry, including the biggest financial firms on Wall Street."
A 2024 paper published in Cambridge University's Perspectives on Politics journal identified Guynn as part of a "vast subterranean world of regulatory influence-seeking" that has managed to escape the scrutiny of legislative lobbying.
"Reporting exceptions under the Lobbying Disclosure Act allow many of the most powerful advocates to characterize their activity as lawyering, not lobbying, and thereby fly under the radar," the paper notes.
Kelleher argued that, given Guynn's history, "the only reasonable expectation is that his leadership of Fed supervision and regulation will accelerate the Fed’s current push to implement policies that favor the biggest, most dangerous banks—his former clients just ten months ago and presumably his current circle of professional and personal friends."
"That will crush small banks, harm the Main Street economy, and make another financial crash inevitable. That’s what happened in the early 2000s when the Fed’s misguided belief that Wall Street could regulate itself directly led to the catastrophic 2008 crash," said Kelleher. "We don’t have to speculate. We can look at his attached record or read the remarkable story of how, as a lawyer-lobbyist prior to joining the Fed staff last year, he was instrumental in pushing through a back-door merger approval by the Fed."
"There can be little doubt that having a Wall Street lawyer-lobbyist in charge of supervising and regulating his former Wall Street clients will likely result in a catastrophe for the American people," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Ocean Warming Drives 'Deeply Concerning Loss of Marine Life,' Study Shows
Noting that species are at risk from not only warming waters but also overfishing, one expert argued that "any management reform must simultaneously address both drivers of change."
Feb 25, 2026
Humanity's continued reliance on fossil fuels led to last year being among the hottest on record, and oceans store over 90% of the excess heat from greenhouse gases. A study out Wednesday details how the related long-term heating, warm years, and marine heatwaves "pose serious but poorly quantified threats" to fish species.
"To put it simply, the faster the ocean floor warms, the faster we lose fish," lead author Shahar Chaikin of Spain's National Museum of Natural Sciences (MNCN) told the Guardian. "A 7.2% decline for every tenth of a degree per decade might sound small... But compounded over time, across entire ocean basins, it represents a staggering and deeply concerning loss of marine life."
For the study, published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution, Chaikin, his MNCN colleague Miguel B. Araújo and the National University of Colombia's Juan David González-Trujillo analyzed 702,037 estimates of biomass change for 33,990 populations of 1,566 fish species across the Mediterranean, north Atlantic, and northeast Pacific between 1993 and 2021.
"On shorter timescales, warmer years and marine heatwaves were linked to sharp biomass losses of up to 43.4% in populations at the warm edge of the species' range and biomass increases of up to 176% at the cold edge," the study states. Chaikin warned in a statement that the temporary jumps in cooler areas could send misleading signals to managers of fisheries.
"Although this sudden increase in biomass in cold waters may seem like good news for fisheries, these are transient increases," he explained. "If managers raise catch quotas based on biomass increases caused by a heatwave, they risk causing the collapse of populations when temperatures return to normal or when the effect of long-term warming prevails, because these are short-lived increases."
González-Trujillo stressed that "unlike extreme short-term weather fluctuations, which can vary dramatically, this chronic warming exerts a constant negative pressure on fish populations in the Mediterranean Sea, the north Atlantic Ocean, and the northeastern Pacific Ocean."
Specifically, Chaikin said that "when we remove the noise of extreme short-term weather events, the data show that this warming is associated with a sustained annual decline in biomass of up to 19.8%."
Are warmer oceans good or bad for #fish? 🐟 The answer is a dangerous paradox. Our new paper in @natecoevo.nature.com shows how marine heatwaves may create “fake” fish gains that mask a large-scale crash. Read our findings here: www.nature.com/articles/s41...@mncn-csic.bsky.social #ClimateChange
[image or embed]
— Shahar Chaikin (@shaharchaikin.bsky.social) February 25, 2026 at 5:05 AM
Given the findings, Araújo emphasized that fisheries' managers "must balance localized increases with long-term declines extremely carefully to avoid overexploitation."
"As ocean warming continues, the only viable strategy is to prioritize long-term resilience," the study co-author said. "Management measures must plan for the biomass decline expected in an increasingly warm ocean."
Carlos García-Soto is a scientist at the Spanish National Research Council, which manages MNCN. Although not a study co-author, he also highlighted the need for policymakers to understand the "clear risk of misinterpretation" detailed in the new paper.
"In a context of accelerated climate change, policies cannot react solely to extreme events or be based on short-term signals," García-Soto said in a statement. "They need consistency between science, planning, and governance, especially in shared ecosystems or on the high seas."
Also responding to the research on Wednesday, Guillermo Ortuño Crespo of the International Union for Conservation of Nature said that "I believe this is a methodologically sound and valuable study that provides valuable evidence on how different components of ocean warming affect fish biomass."
While recognizing the well-documented and devastating impacts of fossil fuel-driven heating on marine species, Ortuño Crespo also warned that "there is a risk, in my opinion, that climate change will become the main explanation for changes in marine species biomass, leaving aside overfishing."
"Historically, overfishing has been the main determinant of biomass declines in many fisheries around the world," he noted, citing the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. "The proportion of overexploited stocks globally continues to increase, indicating that fishing pressure remains a dominant risk factor. The current challenge is that this overfishing crisis is being further exacerbated by ocean warming and deoxygenation."
"In terms of public policy, the study is highly relevant because it emphasizes that fisheries management systems must become more climate-adaptive," Ortuño Crespo said. "Any management reform must simultaneously address both drivers of change: climate and fisheries. Adjusting quotas solely on the basis of climate without reducing overcapacity and the impact of high-impact gear, such as bottom trawling, is likely to be insufficient to recover stocks."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


