Full Version: Snuffysmith's Blog - June 26th - September 17th, 2007
Common Ground Common Sense > National & International News > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media Archive
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40
Changing course on Iran- by Abbas Edalat, Mehrnaz Shahabi - 2007-09-10
The Truth behind 911: Who is Osama bin Laden?.Article first published on September 12th, 2001 - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2007-09-10
Why was a nuclear-armed bomber allowed to fly over the US?- by Bill Van Auken - 2007-09-09
Another 9/11
In a long series. Article by Robert Higgs.
In a long series. Article by Robert Higgs.
The Lighthouse
“Enlightening Ideas for Public Policy”
Volume 9, Issue 37: September 10, 2007
In this week’s issue:
1) 9/11 and Expansion of Government Power
2) CIA Report Misses Key Mistake Leading to 9/11
3) Sophie Scholl Dramatizes Moral Courage versus the Banality of Evil
4) Documentary Exposes Anti-Poor Biases of Mining Foes
9/11 and Expansion of Government Power
“During the past six years, 9/11 has often served as an all-purpose instrument in the state’s propaganda kit,” writes Independent Institute Senior Fellow Robert Higgs in a new op-ed. “For the Bush administration, it has provided the answer to every critical question about foreign and defense policies, among other things.”
Critics of the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, the huge increase in spending for “homeland security” (much of it political pork that contributes nothing to public safety), the expansion of domestic surveillance, and the accretion of executive power may crow all they like. In the end, it seems as though the feds need simply invoke the imagery of the brutal al-Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001, and their wishes are granted.
“No one needs to wait twenty or thirty years, however, to understand how the government has exploited 9/11 at every turn to provide a knock-down justification of its irresponsible (and sometimes criminal) political, legal, military, and fiscal actions,” Higgs continues. “For the Bush administration, no mistakes are ever made, because no matter what the government chooses to do and no matter how disastrously that action works out in practice, it is always alleged to rest on the same purportedly unimpeachable foundation—9/11.”
“Another 9/11—in a Long Series,” by Robert Higgs (9/10/07) Spanish Translation (pending)
The Resurgence of the Warfare State: The Crisis Since 9/11, by Robert Higgs
Neither Liberty nor Safety: Fear, Ideology, and the Growth of Government, by Robert Higgs
CIA Report Misses Key Mistake Leading to 9/11
The CIA’s Office of Inspector General issued a report last month on the agency’s failures in the lead up to 9/11. While recognizing numerous small failures that prevented the agency from “connecting the dots,” the report is especially critical of the agency’s lack of a comprehensive strategy for combating al-Qaeda.
According to Independent Institute Senior Fellow Charles Pena, however, the greatest failure of policymakers was their conduct of U.S. foreign policy in the Islamic world, which created the anti-American sentiment that motivated the 9/11 terrorists.
“Certainly, al-Qaida—not Americans or American society—is solely responsible for the death and destruction of those attacks,” writes Pena. “But the U.S. government must be held accountable for ill-conceived policies that have helped motivate terrorism�. To understand what the U.S. government could have done better to prevent Sept. 11 and to understand how we might prevent future terrorist attacks, we need to adopt a more humble foreign policy, as candidate Bush advocated in 2000. That responsibility rests squarely in the Oval Office, not at CIA headquarters in Virginia.”
“U.S. Requires a More Humble, Nuanced Foreign Policy,” by Charles Pena (9/10/07) Spanish Translation (pending)
More by Charles Pena
“Enlightening Ideas for Public Policy”
Volume 9, Issue 37: September 10, 2007
In this week’s issue:
1) 9/11 and Expansion of Government Power
2) CIA Report Misses Key Mistake Leading to 9/11
3) Sophie Scholl Dramatizes Moral Courage versus the Banality of Evil
4) Documentary Exposes Anti-Poor Biases of Mining Foes
9/11 and Expansion of Government Power
“During the past six years, 9/11 has often served as an all-purpose instrument in the state’s propaganda kit,” writes Independent Institute Senior Fellow Robert Higgs in a new op-ed. “For the Bush administration, it has provided the answer to every critical question about foreign and defense policies, among other things.”
Critics of the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, the huge increase in spending for “homeland security” (much of it political pork that contributes nothing to public safety), the expansion of domestic surveillance, and the accretion of executive power may crow all they like. In the end, it seems as though the feds need simply invoke the imagery of the brutal al-Qaeda attacks of September 11, 2001, and their wishes are granted.
“No one needs to wait twenty or thirty years, however, to understand how the government has exploited 9/11 at every turn to provide a knock-down justification of its irresponsible (and sometimes criminal) political, legal, military, and fiscal actions,” Higgs continues. “For the Bush administration, no mistakes are ever made, because no matter what the government chooses to do and no matter how disastrously that action works out in practice, it is always alleged to rest on the same purportedly unimpeachable foundation—9/11.”
“Another 9/11—in a Long Series,” by Robert Higgs (9/10/07) Spanish Translation (pending)
The Resurgence of the Warfare State: The Crisis Since 9/11, by Robert Higgs
Neither Liberty nor Safety: Fear, Ideology, and the Growth of Government, by Robert Higgs
CIA Report Misses Key Mistake Leading to 9/11
The CIA’s Office of Inspector General issued a report last month on the agency’s failures in the lead up to 9/11. While recognizing numerous small failures that prevented the agency from “connecting the dots,” the report is especially critical of the agency’s lack of a comprehensive strategy for combating al-Qaeda.
According to Independent Institute Senior Fellow Charles Pena, however, the greatest failure of policymakers was their conduct of U.S. foreign policy in the Islamic world, which created the anti-American sentiment that motivated the 9/11 terrorists.
“Certainly, al-Qaida—not Americans or American society—is solely responsible for the death and destruction of those attacks,” writes Pena. “But the U.S. government must be held accountable for ill-conceived policies that have helped motivate terrorism�. To understand what the U.S. government could have done better to prevent Sept. 11 and to understand how we might prevent future terrorist attacks, we need to adopt a more humble foreign policy, as candidate Bush advocated in 2000. That responsibility rests squarely in the Oval Office, not at CIA headquarters in Virginia.”
“U.S. Requires a More Humble, Nuanced Foreign Policy,” by Charles Pena (9/10/07) Spanish Translation (pending)
More by Charles Pena
Foreign Policy News and Commentary Update September 10, 2007
John Brown, 'Walk Away from the Lies: A Recommendation to General Petraeus from a Foreign Service Officer? (Common Dreams, September 9): 'When you speak before the Congress, General, may I suggest that, instead of promising 'victory' in Iraq ... you should announce your resignation from your commission, as one more effort to help bring an illegitimate war to an end."
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/09/3713/
SEE ALSO
http://www.salon.com/comics/opus/2007/09/09/opus/
ARE WE SAFER TODAY? SIX YEARS AFTER 9/11 AND THREE YEARS AFTER THE 9/11 REPORT, IS THE U.S. READY TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT TERRORISM? - THOMAS H. KEAN AND LEE H. HAMILTON (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9, 2007): Military power is essential to our security, but if the only tool is a hammer, pretty soon every problem looks like a nail. We must use all the tools of U.S. power -- including foreign aid, educational assistance and vigorous public diplomacy that emphasizes scholarship, libraries and exchange programs -- to shape a Middle East and a Muslim world that are less hostile to our interests and values. America's long-term security relies on being viewed not as a threat but as a source of opportunity and hope.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702050_pf.html
THE MEANING OF BIN LADEN'S NEW VIDEO (LAURENCEJARVIKONLINE: A BLOG ABOUT INTERESTING IDEAS, THINGS, PEOPLE, AND EVENTS, SEPTEMBER 10): That six years after 9/11 Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) senior correspondent Judy Woodruff even thought Bin Laden might have made some sense, demonstrates how skillful Al Qaeda propaganda -- and how inept Bush administration "public diplomacy" -- has been. Bin Laden's speech is an example of what David Horowitz' book calls an unholy alliance between the radical left and Islamist extremists.
http://laurencejarvikonline.blogspot.com/2...-new-video.html
THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES' FOREIGN POLICY STATEMENTS: RUDOLPH GIULIANI CHERYL ROFER (WHIRLED VIEW, SEPTEMBER 10): Among Giuliani's foreign policy statements: Make changes in the State Department and the Foreign Service. Refine the diplomats' mission down to their core purpose: presenting U.S. policy to the rest of the world. Our ambassadors must clearly understand and clearly advocate for U.S. policies and be judged on the results. Strengthen and broaden the Voice of America; expand Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. Upgrade and extend public diplomacy and strategic communications, with a greater focus on new media such as the Internet.
http://whirledview.typepad.com/whirledview...resident-1.html
TAKE GONZALES, PLEASE! (PEOPLE'S WEEKLY WORLD, SEPTEMBER 6): Texas newspapers listed a rogue?s gallery of former Bushites already nesting in Texas' bosom. Where do Americans think the underhanded Karl Rove will lurk? What about propagandist Karen Hughes?
http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/11684/1/389
NUMBERS MATTER: EUROPEANS TELL BUSH - TRANS-ATLANTIC BRUISES LINGER - JOSH WARD (SPIEGEL INTERNATIONAL, SEPTEMBER 7): A new survey of European attitudes toward America released this week holds that: We share your fear of terrorists. We don't like Bush. And we don't necessarily plan on being nice once he's gone. At the same time, another world poll adds: And, please, leave Iraq.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe...,504475,00.html
SEE ALSO
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs...iraq_poll07.pdf
POLL HIGHLIGHTS DISCONNECT BETWEEN U.S. COMMANDERS, IRAQIS - MEGAN GREENWELL (WASHINGTON POST STAFF SEPTEMBER 10): Seven out of 10 Iraqis believe the U.S. troop buildup in Baghdad and Anbar province has made security worse in those areas, and nearly as many say their own lives are going badly, according to a new poll.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1000528_pf.html
WIDE SKEPTICISM AHEAD OF ASSESSMENT: POLL RESPONDENTS DOUBT PETRAEUS WILL GIVE TRUE PICTURE OF SITUATION IN IRAQ - JON COHEN AND JENNIFER AGIESTA (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7090801777.html
TOMGRAM: LAUNCHING BRAND PETRAEUS TOM ENGELHARDT (TOMDISPATCH, SEPTEMBER 9): Think of it this way: The most political general in recent memory has been asked to assess his own work (as has our ambassador in Iraq), and then present "recommendations" to the White House in a "report" that is actually being written in the White House. You couldn't call it a political version of "the honor system"; but perhaps the dishonor system would do.
http://tomdispatch.com/post/174834/launching_brand_petraeus
PETRAEUS REPORT ALREADY SEEN AS BS ? WISCO (GRIPER BLADE: GRUMBLINGS FROM THE HEARTLAND, SEPTEMBER 10): Bush's propaganda is dismissed these days before it's even presented.
http://griperblade.blogspot.com/2007/09/pe...seen-as-bs.html
SEPTEMBER PROPAGANDA SPECTACULAR DAVE (SEPTEMBER 10, THE DAILY RECKONING'S DESIDOORU SALOON): So here we are, a day before the sixth anniversary of 9/11, at the launch of what could be an unprecedented week of Washington-generated propaganda. Gen. Petraeus will lie to Congress so as to keep the farce going: He'll say the 'surge' needs more time to demonstrate its effectiveness.
http://www.dailyreckoning.us/blog/?p=523
AS THE IRAQIS STAND DOWN, WE'LL STAND UP - FRANK RICH (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): The stay-the-surge propaganda offensive crests with this week's Congressional testimony of Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, with history repeating itself in almost every particular.
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE DC ESTABLISHMENT VERSUS AMERICAN PUBLIC OPINION - GLENN GREENWALD (SALON, SEPTEMBER 9): The P.R. campaign to persuade the country that the Surge is Succeeding has been as intense and potent as any P.R. campaign since the one that justified the invasion itself.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/200...ment/index.html
AMONG TOP OFFICIALS, 'SURGE' HAS SPARKED DISSENT, INFIGHTING - PETER BAKER, KAREN DEYOUNG, THOMAS E. RICKS, ANN SCOTT TYSON, JOBY WARRICK AND ROBIN WRIGHT AND RESEARCHER JULIE TATE (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): From the start of the Bush surge plan, the White House communications office had been blitzing an e-mail list of as many as 5,000 journalists, lawmakers, lobbyists, conservative bloggers, military groups and others with talking points or rebuttals of criticism. Between Jan. 10 and last week, the office put out 94 such documents in various categories -- "Myths/Facts" or "Setting the Record Straight" to take issue with negative news articles, and "In Case You Missed It" to distribute positive articles or speeches.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0801846_pf.html
ARE PETRAEUS AND WESTMORELAND BIRDS OF A FEATHER? - RAY MCGOVERN (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 8): What Gen. David Petraeus has set in motion, or at least condoned, is the massaging of data to justify what his boss, President Bush, wants to do in Iraq; namely, to keep enough troops "in the fight" in order to stave off definitive defeat before he and Vice President Dick Cheney leave office in January 2009. That's what the "surge" is all about, and Petraeus is smart enough to know that only too well.
http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=11572
CROSS-EXAMINE PETRAEUS: THE GENERAL AND AMBASSADOR CROCKER MUST DO MORE THAN ARGUE THAT THE 'SURGE' IS WORKING; THEY MUST GIVE BUSH AN EXIT STRATEGY ? EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 8)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-...pinion-leftrail
ACCEPTING IRAQI REALITY: BOTH PRESIDENT BUSH AND CONGRESS NEED TO ADJUST TO THE MIXED RESULTS OF THE 'SURGE' ? EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): If there is to be no political accord in the near future -- and such an accord seems as distant today as it did in January -- what will be the goals of the U.S. mission in Iraq? The president needs to spell out concrete and realistic aims for American forces -- and limit troop levels to those necessary to accomplish them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0801421_pf.html
PETRAEUS CANNOT SALVAGE A DEBACLE ? EDITORIAL (FINANCIAL TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Petraeus report on the 'surge' of US troops is likely to be non-committal, and overshadowed by 9/11 anniversary stagecraft designed to eclipse any suggestion of failure in a surge of patriotism as Americans recall the atrocity visited upon them by the al-Qaeda attacks six years ago. Yet it is high time for a hard-nosed summary of the Iraq debacle.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bdf5d888-5efe-11...00779fd2ac.html
LETTING SOLDIERS DO THE THINKING - GEORGE F. WILL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): The surge is a tactical success disconnected from the strategic objective it is supposed to serve.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702252_pf.html
HOW TO VIEW THE REPORT ON THE SURGE - BRIAN KATULIS (WASHINGTONPOST.COM, SEPTEMBER 10): To end the conflict in Iraq, the U.S. must get Iraq's national leaders to agree to share power and take responsibility for their own affairs -- something not yet achieved by staying with the same strategy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702180_pf.html
THE 'SURGE' IS WORKING: CASUALTIES ARE DOWN AND SECURITY IS IMPROVING IN IRAQ; WASHINGTON MUST GIVE THE STRATEGY MORE TIME - MAX BOOT (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 8)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions
BACK FROM IRAQ, STILL FACING FIRE (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): Today and tomorrow, the United States ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, and the top American general there, David Petraeus, will appear before Congress to offer a progress report on the war. The Op-Ed page asked six experts on the Iraq conflict to come up with three questions they would pose to the two men.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/opinion/...agewanted=print
WILL BUSH'S TRAGEDY TRAP HIS SUCCESSOR IN IRAQ? - GRAHAM ALLISON (HUFFINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 7): No one should have any doubt about President Bush's overriding operational objective. It is to hand over this war to his successor.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/graham-allis...p-_b_63511.html
WHAT'S MISSING IN BAGHDAD - THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Above all, Iraq teaches us that democracy is possible only when people want both pillars of it ? liberty and self-government ? and build both themselves. We?re miles away from that in Baghdad.
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/opini...agewanted=print
US BRIBE INSURGENTS TO FIGHT AL-QAEDA -MARIE COLVIN AND SARAH BAXTER (TIMES, LONDON, SEPTEMBER 9): American forces are paying Sunni insurgents hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to switch sides and help them to defeat Al-Qaeda in Iraq. The tactic has boosted the efforts of American forces to restore some order to war-torn provinces around Baghdad in the run-up to a report by General David Petraeus to Congress.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle2413200.ece
'YOU HAVE LIBERATED A PEOPLE' - FOUAD AJAMI (WALL STREET JOURNAL, SEPTEMBER 10): Peace has not come to Iraq, the feuds have not fully burned out, but the center holds.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1189387161...in_commentaries
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
SETTING THE TONE ? OLIVER NORTH (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): In Iraq sectarian rivalries can be overcome and security restored in places previously thought to be hopeless.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.d...mplate=printart
ACCEPTING IRAQI REALITY: BOTH PRESIDENT BUSH AND CONGRESS NEED TO ADJUST TO THE MIXED RESULTS OF THE 'SURGE' EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): If there is to be no political accord in the near future -- and such an accord seems as distant today as it did in January -- what will be the goals of the U.S. mission in Iraq? The president needs to spell out concrete and realistic aims for American forces -- and limit troop levels to those necessary to accomplish them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0801421_pf.html
REPORTERS: THE IRAQ REPORTS, SHORT - BARRON YOUNGSMITH, MARIN COGAN & MELANIE MASON (TNR ONLINE, SEPTEMBER 7): In recent weeks, a flood of highly-touted evaluations, studies, and analyses of the state of Iraq have generated numerous headlines. But which ones are the most trustworthy, and which ones are going to matter the most (two categories that are often, sadly, independent)? The below link contains handy summary of how to tell them apart, and what you need to know about their conclusions.
http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=w07091...aqreports090707
THE OTHER VICTIMS IN IRAQ - MOKHTAR LAMANI AND HE HANY BESADA (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 8): With precious time left, neighboring governments and occupying forces ought to muster enough courage, even to the detriment of their short-term foreign policy objectives, to treat Iraq's minorities with special care and consideration.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...in_iraq?mode=PF
PLANNING FOR DEFEAT: HOW SHOULD WE WITHDRAW FROM IRAQ? - GEORGE PACKER (NEW YORKER, SEPTEMBER 17): America?s diplomatic leverage will be weakened by a withdrawal, and Iraq?s predatory neighbors will take advantage of the power vacuum to pursue their own interests. Whenever this country decides that the bloody experience in Iraq requires the departure of American troops, complete disengagement will be neither desirable nor possible. We might want to be rid of Iraq, but Iraq won?t let it happen.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/09...?printable=true
HIDING BEHIND THE GENERAL EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Mr. Bush, deeply unpopular with the American people, is counting on General Petraeus to restore credibility to his discredited Iraq policy. The United States needs a prudent exit strategy that will withdraw American forces and try to stop Iraq?s chaos from spreading.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/opinion/...agewanted=print
HOW TO WITHDRAW QUICKLY AND SAFELY - LAWRENCE J. KORB AND MAX A. BERGMANN (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 9): A withdrawal of US forces will be complex. But it can be accomplished safely within one year's time through careful planning and by focusing on getting out sensitive and critical equipment.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial..._safely?mode=PF
IRAQ REPORT INCLUDES TROOPS TIMETABLE: INSTITUTE SUPPORTS COMPLETE EXIT IN FIVE YEARS, PRESSES FACTIONS TO NEGOTIATE - ROBIN WRIGHT (WASHINGTON POST STAFF SEPTEMBER 9): In a report to be released today, a panel of experts assembled by the U.S. Institute of Peace calls for a 50 percent reduction in U.S. forces in Iraq within three years and a total withdrawal and handover of security to the Iraqi military in five years.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews
WHY WE SHOULD EXIT IRAQ NOW - BILL RICHARDSON (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 8): The presence of American forces in Iraq weakens us in the war against al-Qaeda. It endows the anti-American propaganda of those who portray us as occupiers plundering Iraq's oil and repressing Muslims. The day we leave, this myth collapses, and the Iraqis will drive foreign jihadists out of their country.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702063_pf.html
WHY WE MUST LEAVE IRAQ EDITORIAL (NATION, SEPTEMBER 6): Not only is withdrawing from Iraq in our national interest; it is also the moral, responsible thing to do. There is one way to atone for our illegal invasion and reckon with the human catastrophe our occupation has caused: End the occupation and abandon the pretense that only American power can bring order and democracy to the region.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070924/editors
WILL THE US REALLY BOMB IRAN? - ALEXANDER COCKBURN (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 8/9): Weigh it all up, and you'd be foolish to bet that an attack on Iran won't happen.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09082007.html
US VIEWED AS TURKEY'S 'GREATEST THREAT' - JONATHAN BELL (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 7): Nearly two-thirds of the Turkish public named the United States as their country's greatest future threat, a recent Pew Global Attitudes Project survey has revealed -- the highest percentage of any Middle Eastern or Islamic country polled.
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/bell.php?articleid=11575
THE 'ISRAEL LOBBY' MYTH - GEORGE P. SHULTZ (U.S. WORLD & NEWS REPORT, SEPTEMBER 9): Jewish groups are influential. They also largely agree that the United States should support Israel. But the notion that they have anything like a uniform agenda and that U.S. policy in Israel and the Middle East is the result of this influence is simply wrong.
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/200...-myth_print.htm
THE NEW AL-QAEDA CENTRAL: FAR FROM DECLINING, THE NETWORK HAS REBUILT, WITH FRESH FACES AND A VIGOROUS MEDIA ARM - CRAIG WHITLOCK (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews
EYE OF THE TERROR STORM - VICTOR DAVIS HANSON (COMMON DREAMS, SEPTEMBER 8): Six years of quiet at home have fooled some into thinking terrorists pose little danger here -- or that we may be doing far too much rather than too little to stop such killers.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.d...mplate=printart
HIS TOUGHNESS PROBLEM?AND OURS [REVIEW OF WORLD WAR IV: THE LONG STRUGGLE AGAINST ISLAMOFASCISM BY NORMAN PODHORETZ] - IAN BURUMA (NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, SEPTEMBER 27): World War IV expresses a weird longing for the state of war, for the clarity it brings, and for the chance to divide one's fellow citizens, or indeed the whole world, neatly into friends and foes, comrades and traitors, warriors and appeasers, those who are with us and those who are against. When it comes to the specifics of the war, exactly whom we are supposed to be fighting, why it is a fourth world war, and how it relates to earlier wars,Podhoretz becomes fuzzy indeed.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20590
ENEMIES LIST [REVIEW OF WORLD WAR IV THE LONG STRUGGLE AGAINST ISLAMOFASCISM BY NORMAN PODHORETZ; THE IRANIAN TIME BOMB THE MULLAH ZEALOTS? QUEST FOR DESTRUCTION BY MICHAEL A. LEDEEN] - PETER BEINART (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Unlike Podhoretz, for whom ?World War IV? is largely an excuse to insult his old foes on the left and titillate himself with fantasies of civic violence, Michael Ledeen has written an actual book on the Middle East. In particular, he is passionate about Iran. If Podhoretz is vague about whom exactly America is fighting, Ledeen is precise: everything traces back to Tehran.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/books/re...amp;oref=slogin
AN ANTITERRORISM LESSON EDITORIAL (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 8): The arrest Tuesday of three suspects in a plot to carry out bombings in Germany offers crucial lessons about preventing terrorism. Some of those lessons have to do with the tactics of law-enforcement and intelligence agencies. But the most beneficial insight Americans could gain from the German example is that war is the wrong metaphor for a nation's defense against terrorism.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial..._lesson?mode=PF
WAR ON TERROR IS WORKING - JEFF JACOBY (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 9): What is in the enemy's mind we cannot know for sure. What we do know -- what 9/11 made brutally clear -- is that we are at war. The enemy is in this till the finish. We had better be, too.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...working?mode=PF
WHERE'S THE WAR? THE PLACIDITY OF THE DOMESTIC FRONT - MARK STEYN (NATIONAL REVIEW, SEPTEMBER 9): On this sixth anniversary, as 9/11 retreats into history, many Americans see no war at all.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGE4Z...GFlYjM0YWE5ODE=
A U.S. GENERAL'S DISQUIET - ROGER COHEN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): 'Our current problems raise the legitimate question of whether the U.S., or any democracy, can successfully prosecute an extended war without a true national commitment,? writes Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli. Unless you believe the United States can simply withdraw from the world, a popular but naïve view, that essential strategic question needs addressing beyond the Iraq tactics before Congress this week. An answer is the minimum the now overstretched shopping nation owes the long overstretched fighting nation it seldom notices.' http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/opini...agewanted=print
FROM GONZO TO POTTYGATE: THE IRRATIONAL DRAMA OF A DECLINING EMPIRE - SAUL LANDAU (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 8/9): As Bush's empire sink lower in world opinion polls, the drama moves from surrealism to cruel teenage comedy.
http://www.counterpunch.org/landau09082007.html
FADING SUPERPOWER? LIKE ALL EMPIRES BEFORE IT, THE U.S. WILL SLIP FROM THE TOP OF THE HEAP. LET'S START GETTING READY - DAVID RIEFF (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): For the moment, the U.S. is the sole superpower. But instead of deluding ourselves that we will go on that way into the indeterminate future, an intelligently self-interested foreign policy would have us do everything in our power to shape, according to our most urgent priorities, the international rules that will govern relations between states after the American moment has passed -- as it inevitably will.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-...-opinion-center
ON LANGUAGE: REDACT THIS - WILLIAM SAFIRE (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): 9/11 is an Americanism not picked up by the rest of the English-speaking world because we put the number of the month ahead of the number of the day; from Britain to Australia, 9/11 signifies not the 11th day of September, but the 9th day of November. Over there, they refer to 'the attacks of 11 September 2001' or 'the World Trade Center attack' (which leaves out the crash into the Pentagon and Flight 93).
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/magazine...agewanted=print
John Brown, 'Walk Away from the Lies: A Recommendation to General Petraeus from a Foreign Service Officer? (Common Dreams, September 9): 'When you speak before the Congress, General, may I suggest that, instead of promising 'victory' in Iraq ... you should announce your resignation from your commission, as one more effort to help bring an illegitimate war to an end."
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/09/09/3713/
SEE ALSO
http://www.salon.com/comics/opus/2007/09/09/opus/
ARE WE SAFER TODAY? SIX YEARS AFTER 9/11 AND THREE YEARS AFTER THE 9/11 REPORT, IS THE U.S. READY TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT TERRORISM? - THOMAS H. KEAN AND LEE H. HAMILTON (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9, 2007): Military power is essential to our security, but if the only tool is a hammer, pretty soon every problem looks like a nail. We must use all the tools of U.S. power -- including foreign aid, educational assistance and vigorous public diplomacy that emphasizes scholarship, libraries and exchange programs -- to shape a Middle East and a Muslim world that are less hostile to our interests and values. America's long-term security relies on being viewed not as a threat but as a source of opportunity and hope.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702050_pf.html
THE MEANING OF BIN LADEN'S NEW VIDEO (LAURENCEJARVIKONLINE: A BLOG ABOUT INTERESTING IDEAS, THINGS, PEOPLE, AND EVENTS, SEPTEMBER 10): That six years after 9/11 Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) senior correspondent Judy Woodruff even thought Bin Laden might have made some sense, demonstrates how skillful Al Qaeda propaganda -- and how inept Bush administration "public diplomacy" -- has been. Bin Laden's speech is an example of what David Horowitz' book calls an unholy alliance between the radical left and Islamist extremists.
http://laurencejarvikonline.blogspot.com/2...-new-video.html
THE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES' FOREIGN POLICY STATEMENTS: RUDOLPH GIULIANI CHERYL ROFER (WHIRLED VIEW, SEPTEMBER 10): Among Giuliani's foreign policy statements: Make changes in the State Department and the Foreign Service. Refine the diplomats' mission down to their core purpose: presenting U.S. policy to the rest of the world. Our ambassadors must clearly understand and clearly advocate for U.S. policies and be judged on the results. Strengthen and broaden the Voice of America; expand Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. Upgrade and extend public diplomacy and strategic communications, with a greater focus on new media such as the Internet.
http://whirledview.typepad.com/whirledview...resident-1.html
TAKE GONZALES, PLEASE! (PEOPLE'S WEEKLY WORLD, SEPTEMBER 6): Texas newspapers listed a rogue?s gallery of former Bushites already nesting in Texas' bosom. Where do Americans think the underhanded Karl Rove will lurk? What about propagandist Karen Hughes?
http://www.pww.org/article/articleview/11684/1/389
NUMBERS MATTER: EUROPEANS TELL BUSH - TRANS-ATLANTIC BRUISES LINGER - JOSH WARD (SPIEGEL INTERNATIONAL, SEPTEMBER 7): A new survey of European attitudes toward America released this week holds that: We share your fear of terrorists. We don't like Bush. And we don't necessarily plan on being nice once he's gone. At the same time, another world poll adds: And, please, leave Iraq.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe...,504475,00.html
SEE ALSO
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs...iraq_poll07.pdf
POLL HIGHLIGHTS DISCONNECT BETWEEN U.S. COMMANDERS, IRAQIS - MEGAN GREENWELL (WASHINGTON POST STAFF SEPTEMBER 10): Seven out of 10 Iraqis believe the U.S. troop buildup in Baghdad and Anbar province has made security worse in those areas, and nearly as many say their own lives are going badly, according to a new poll.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...1000528_pf.html
WIDE SKEPTICISM AHEAD OF ASSESSMENT: POLL RESPONDENTS DOUBT PETRAEUS WILL GIVE TRUE PICTURE OF SITUATION IN IRAQ - JON COHEN AND JENNIFER AGIESTA (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7090801777.html
TOMGRAM: LAUNCHING BRAND PETRAEUS TOM ENGELHARDT (TOMDISPATCH, SEPTEMBER 9): Think of it this way: The most political general in recent memory has been asked to assess his own work (as has our ambassador in Iraq), and then present "recommendations" to the White House in a "report" that is actually being written in the White House. You couldn't call it a political version of "the honor system"; but perhaps the dishonor system would do.
http://tomdispatch.com/post/174834/launching_brand_petraeus
PETRAEUS REPORT ALREADY SEEN AS BS ? WISCO (GRIPER BLADE: GRUMBLINGS FROM THE HEARTLAND, SEPTEMBER 10): Bush's propaganda is dismissed these days before it's even presented.
http://griperblade.blogspot.com/2007/09/pe...seen-as-bs.html
SEPTEMBER PROPAGANDA SPECTACULAR DAVE (SEPTEMBER 10, THE DAILY RECKONING'S DESIDOORU SALOON): So here we are, a day before the sixth anniversary of 9/11, at the launch of what could be an unprecedented week of Washington-generated propaganda. Gen. Petraeus will lie to Congress so as to keep the farce going: He'll say the 'surge' needs more time to demonstrate its effectiveness.
http://www.dailyreckoning.us/blog/?p=523
AS THE IRAQIS STAND DOWN, WE'LL STAND UP - FRANK RICH (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): The stay-the-surge propaganda offensive crests with this week's Congressional testimony of Gen. David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker, with history repeating itself in almost every particular.
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/opini...agewanted=print
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
THE DC ESTABLISHMENT VERSUS AMERICAN PUBLIC OPINION - GLENN GREENWALD (SALON, SEPTEMBER 9): The P.R. campaign to persuade the country that the Surge is Succeeding has been as intense and potent as any P.R. campaign since the one that justified the invasion itself.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/200...ment/index.html
AMONG TOP OFFICIALS, 'SURGE' HAS SPARKED DISSENT, INFIGHTING - PETER BAKER, KAREN DEYOUNG, THOMAS E. RICKS, ANN SCOTT TYSON, JOBY WARRICK AND ROBIN WRIGHT AND RESEARCHER JULIE TATE (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): From the start of the Bush surge plan, the White House communications office had been blitzing an e-mail list of as many as 5,000 journalists, lawmakers, lobbyists, conservative bloggers, military groups and others with talking points or rebuttals of criticism. Between Jan. 10 and last week, the office put out 94 such documents in various categories -- "Myths/Facts" or "Setting the Record Straight" to take issue with negative news articles, and "In Case You Missed It" to distribute positive articles or speeches.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0801846_pf.html
ARE PETRAEUS AND WESTMORELAND BIRDS OF A FEATHER? - RAY MCGOVERN (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 8): What Gen. David Petraeus has set in motion, or at least condoned, is the massaging of data to justify what his boss, President Bush, wants to do in Iraq; namely, to keep enough troops "in the fight" in order to stave off definitive defeat before he and Vice President Dick Cheney leave office in January 2009. That's what the "surge" is all about, and Petraeus is smart enough to know that only too well.
http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=11572
CROSS-EXAMINE PETRAEUS: THE GENERAL AND AMBASSADOR CROCKER MUST DO MORE THAN ARGUE THAT THE 'SURGE' IS WORKING; THEY MUST GIVE BUSH AN EXIT STRATEGY ? EDITORIAL (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 8)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-...pinion-leftrail
ACCEPTING IRAQI REALITY: BOTH PRESIDENT BUSH AND CONGRESS NEED TO ADJUST TO THE MIXED RESULTS OF THE 'SURGE' ? EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): If there is to be no political accord in the near future -- and such an accord seems as distant today as it did in January -- what will be the goals of the U.S. mission in Iraq? The president needs to spell out concrete and realistic aims for American forces -- and limit troop levels to those necessary to accomplish them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0801421_pf.html
PETRAEUS CANNOT SALVAGE A DEBACLE ? EDITORIAL (FINANCIAL TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Petraeus report on the 'surge' of US troops is likely to be non-committal, and overshadowed by 9/11 anniversary stagecraft designed to eclipse any suggestion of failure in a surge of patriotism as Americans recall the atrocity visited upon them by the al-Qaeda attacks six years ago. Yet it is high time for a hard-nosed summary of the Iraq debacle.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bdf5d888-5efe-11...00779fd2ac.html
LETTING SOLDIERS DO THE THINKING - GEORGE F. WILL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): The surge is a tactical success disconnected from the strategic objective it is supposed to serve.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702252_pf.html
HOW TO VIEW THE REPORT ON THE SURGE - BRIAN KATULIS (WASHINGTONPOST.COM, SEPTEMBER 10): To end the conflict in Iraq, the U.S. must get Iraq's national leaders to agree to share power and take responsibility for their own affairs -- something not yet achieved by staying with the same strategy.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702180_pf.html
THE 'SURGE' IS WORKING: CASUALTIES ARE DOWN AND SECURITY IS IMPROVING IN IRAQ; WASHINGTON MUST GIVE THE STRATEGY MORE TIME - MAX BOOT (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 8)
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commen...omment-opinions
BACK FROM IRAQ, STILL FACING FIRE (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): Today and tomorrow, the United States ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, and the top American general there, David Petraeus, will appear before Congress to offer a progress report on the war. The Op-Ed page asked six experts on the Iraq conflict to come up with three questions they would pose to the two men.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/opinion/...agewanted=print
WILL BUSH'S TRAGEDY TRAP HIS SUCCESSOR IN IRAQ? - GRAHAM ALLISON (HUFFINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 7): No one should have any doubt about President Bush's overriding operational objective. It is to hand over this war to his successor.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/graham-allis...p-_b_63511.html
WHAT'S MISSING IN BAGHDAD - THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Above all, Iraq teaches us that democracy is possible only when people want both pillars of it ? liberty and self-government ? and build both themselves. We?re miles away from that in Baghdad.
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/opini...agewanted=print
US BRIBE INSURGENTS TO FIGHT AL-QAEDA -MARIE COLVIN AND SARAH BAXTER (TIMES, LONDON, SEPTEMBER 9): American forces are paying Sunni insurgents hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash to switch sides and help them to defeat Al-Qaeda in Iraq. The tactic has boosted the efforts of American forces to restore some order to war-torn provinces around Baghdad in the run-up to a report by General David Petraeus to Congress.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/worl...icle2413200.ece
'YOU HAVE LIBERATED A PEOPLE' - FOUAD AJAMI (WALL STREET JOURNAL, SEPTEMBER 10): Peace has not come to Iraq, the feuds have not fully burned out, but the center holds.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1189387161...in_commentaries
PAID SUBSCRIPTION
SETTING THE TONE ? OLIVER NORTH (WASHINGTON TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): In Iraq sectarian rivalries can be overcome and security restored in places previously thought to be hopeless.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.d...mplate=printart
ACCEPTING IRAQI REALITY: BOTH PRESIDENT BUSH AND CONGRESS NEED TO ADJUST TO THE MIXED RESULTS OF THE 'SURGE' EDITORIAL (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9): If there is to be no political accord in the near future -- and such an accord seems as distant today as it did in January -- what will be the goals of the U.S. mission in Iraq? The president needs to spell out concrete and realistic aims for American forces -- and limit troop levels to those necessary to accomplish them.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0801421_pf.html
REPORTERS: THE IRAQ REPORTS, SHORT - BARRON YOUNGSMITH, MARIN COGAN & MELANIE MASON (TNR ONLINE, SEPTEMBER 7): In recent weeks, a flood of highly-touted evaluations, studies, and analyses of the state of Iraq have generated numerous headlines. But which ones are the most trustworthy, and which ones are going to matter the most (two categories that are often, sadly, independent)? The below link contains handy summary of how to tell them apart, and what you need to know about their conclusions.
http://www.tnr.com/docprint.mhtml?i=w07091...aqreports090707
THE OTHER VICTIMS IN IRAQ - MOKHTAR LAMANI AND HE HANY BESADA (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 8): With precious time left, neighboring governments and occupying forces ought to muster enough courage, even to the detriment of their short-term foreign policy objectives, to treat Iraq's minorities with special care and consideration.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...in_iraq?mode=PF
PLANNING FOR DEFEAT: HOW SHOULD WE WITHDRAW FROM IRAQ? - GEORGE PACKER (NEW YORKER, SEPTEMBER 17): America?s diplomatic leverage will be weakened by a withdrawal, and Iraq?s predatory neighbors will take advantage of the power vacuum to pursue their own interests. Whenever this country decides that the bloody experience in Iraq requires the departure of American troops, complete disengagement will be neither desirable nor possible. We might want to be rid of Iraq, but Iraq won?t let it happen.
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/09...?printable=true
HIDING BEHIND THE GENERAL EDITORIAL (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Mr. Bush, deeply unpopular with the American people, is counting on General Petraeus to restore credibility to his discredited Iraq policy. The United States needs a prudent exit strategy that will withdraw American forces and try to stop Iraq?s chaos from spreading.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/opinion/...agewanted=print
HOW TO WITHDRAW QUICKLY AND SAFELY - LAWRENCE J. KORB AND MAX A. BERGMANN (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 9): A withdrawal of US forces will be complex. But it can be accomplished safely within one year's time through careful planning and by focusing on getting out sensitive and critical equipment.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial..._safely?mode=PF
IRAQ REPORT INCLUDES TROOPS TIMETABLE: INSTITUTE SUPPORTS COMPLETE EXIT IN FIVE YEARS, PRESSES FACTIONS TO NEGOTIATE - ROBIN WRIGHT (WASHINGTON POST STAFF SEPTEMBER 9): In a report to be released today, a panel of experts assembled by the U.S. Institute of Peace calls for a 50 percent reduction in U.S. forces in Iraq within three years and a total withdrawal and handover of security to the Iraqi military in five years.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews
WHY WE SHOULD EXIT IRAQ NOW - BILL RICHARDSON (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 8): The presence of American forces in Iraq weakens us in the war against al-Qaeda. It endows the anti-American propaganda of those who portray us as occupiers plundering Iraq's oil and repressing Muslims. The day we leave, this myth collapses, and the Iraqis will drive foreign jihadists out of their country.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...0702063_pf.html
WHY WE MUST LEAVE IRAQ EDITORIAL (NATION, SEPTEMBER 6): Not only is withdrawing from Iraq in our national interest; it is also the moral, responsible thing to do. There is one way to atone for our illegal invasion and reckon with the human catastrophe our occupation has caused: End the occupation and abandon the pretense that only American power can bring order and democracy to the region.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070924/editors
WILL THE US REALLY BOMB IRAN? - ALEXANDER COCKBURN (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 8/9): Weigh it all up, and you'd be foolish to bet that an attack on Iran won't happen.
http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09082007.html
US VIEWED AS TURKEY'S 'GREATEST THREAT' - JONATHAN BELL (ANTIWAR.COM, SEPTEMBER 7): Nearly two-thirds of the Turkish public named the United States as their country's greatest future threat, a recent Pew Global Attitudes Project survey has revealed -- the highest percentage of any Middle Eastern or Islamic country polled.
http://www.antiwar.com/ips/bell.php?articleid=11575
THE 'ISRAEL LOBBY' MYTH - GEORGE P. SHULTZ (U.S. WORLD & NEWS REPORT, SEPTEMBER 9): Jewish groups are influential. They also largely agree that the United States should support Israel. But the notion that they have anything like a uniform agenda and that U.S. policy in Israel and the Middle East is the result of this influence is simply wrong.
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/200...-myth_print.htm
THE NEW AL-QAEDA CENTRAL: FAR FROM DECLINING, THE NETWORK HAS REBUILT, WITH FRESH FACES AND A VIGOROUS MEDIA ARM - CRAIG WHITLOCK (WASHINGTON POST, SEPTEMBER 9)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...ml?hpid=topnews
EYE OF THE TERROR STORM - VICTOR DAVIS HANSON (COMMON DREAMS, SEPTEMBER 8): Six years of quiet at home have fooled some into thinking terrorists pose little danger here -- or that we may be doing far too much rather than too little to stop such killers.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.d...mplate=printart
HIS TOUGHNESS PROBLEM?AND OURS [REVIEW OF WORLD WAR IV: THE LONG STRUGGLE AGAINST ISLAMOFASCISM BY NORMAN PODHORETZ] - IAN BURUMA (NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS, SEPTEMBER 27): World War IV expresses a weird longing for the state of war, for the clarity it brings, and for the chance to divide one's fellow citizens, or indeed the whole world, neatly into friends and foes, comrades and traitors, warriors and appeasers, those who are with us and those who are against. When it comes to the specifics of the war, exactly whom we are supposed to be fighting, why it is a fourth world war, and how it relates to earlier wars,Podhoretz becomes fuzzy indeed.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/20590
ENEMIES LIST [REVIEW OF WORLD WAR IV THE LONG STRUGGLE AGAINST ISLAMOFASCISM BY NORMAN PODHORETZ; THE IRANIAN TIME BOMB THE MULLAH ZEALOTS? QUEST FOR DESTRUCTION BY MICHAEL A. LEDEEN] - PETER BEINART (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): Unlike Podhoretz, for whom ?World War IV? is largely an excuse to insult his old foes on the left and titillate himself with fantasies of civic violence, Michael Ledeen has written an actual book on the Middle East. In particular, he is passionate about Iran. If Podhoretz is vague about whom exactly America is fighting, Ledeen is precise: everything traces back to Tehran.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/books/re...amp;oref=slogin
AN ANTITERRORISM LESSON EDITORIAL (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 8): The arrest Tuesday of three suspects in a plot to carry out bombings in Germany offers crucial lessons about preventing terrorism. Some of those lessons have to do with the tactics of law-enforcement and intelligence agencies. But the most beneficial insight Americans could gain from the German example is that war is the wrong metaphor for a nation's defense against terrorism.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial..._lesson?mode=PF
WAR ON TERROR IS WORKING - JEFF JACOBY (BOSTON GLOBE, SEPTEMBER 9): What is in the enemy's mind we cannot know for sure. What we do know -- what 9/11 made brutally clear -- is that we are at war. The enemy is in this till the finish. We had better be, too.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial...working?mode=PF
WHERE'S THE WAR? THE PLACIDITY OF THE DOMESTIC FRONT - MARK STEYN (NATIONAL REVIEW, SEPTEMBER 9): On this sixth anniversary, as 9/11 retreats into history, many Americans see no war at all.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGE4Z...GFlYjM0YWE5ODE=
A U.S. GENERAL'S DISQUIET - ROGER COHEN (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 10): 'Our current problems raise the legitimate question of whether the U.S., or any democracy, can successfully prosecute an extended war without a true national commitment,? writes Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli. Unless you believe the United States can simply withdraw from the world, a popular but naïve view, that essential strategic question needs addressing beyond the Iraq tactics before Congress this week. An answer is the minimum the now overstretched shopping nation owes the long overstretched fighting nation it seldom notices.' http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/opini...agewanted=print
FROM GONZO TO POTTYGATE: THE IRRATIONAL DRAMA OF A DECLINING EMPIRE - SAUL LANDAU (COUNTERPUNCH, SEPTEMBER 8/9): As Bush's empire sink lower in world opinion polls, the drama moves from surrealism to cruel teenage comedy.
http://www.counterpunch.org/landau09082007.html
FADING SUPERPOWER? LIKE ALL EMPIRES BEFORE IT, THE U.S. WILL SLIP FROM THE TOP OF THE HEAP. LET'S START GETTING READY - DAVID RIEFF (LOS ANGELES TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): For the moment, the U.S. is the sole superpower. But instead of deluding ourselves that we will go on that way into the indeterminate future, an intelligently self-interested foreign policy would have us do everything in our power to shape, according to our most urgent priorities, the international rules that will govern relations between states after the American moment has passed -- as it inevitably will.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-op-...-opinion-center
ON LANGUAGE: REDACT THIS - WILLIAM SAFIRE (NEW YORK TIMES, SEPTEMBER 9): 9/11 is an Americanism not picked up by the rest of the English-speaking world because we put the number of the month ahead of the number of the day; from Britain to Australia, 9/11 signifies not the 11th day of September, but the 9th day of November. Over there, they refer to 'the attacks of 11 September 2001' or 'the World Trade Center attack' (which leaves out the crash into the Pentagon and Flight 93).
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/09/magazine...agewanted=print
Analysis: Iran moves to ditch U.S. dollar
Washington (UPI) Sep 10, 2007 - Faced with U.S. economic sanctions and a weak dollar, Tehran is demanding foreign energy companies do business in yen and euros, despite increasingly desperate need for investment. In a deal announced last week, Japan's Nippon Oil agreed to buy oil from Iran using yen instead of the traditional U.S. dollars. The agreement comes after years of Iranian efforts to shift its petroleum ... more
Washington (UPI) Sep 10, 2007 - Faced with U.S. economic sanctions and a weak dollar, Tehran is demanding foreign energy companies do business in yen and euros, despite increasingly desperate need for investment. In a deal announced last week, Japan's Nippon Oil agreed to buy oil from Iran using yen instead of the traditional U.S. dollars. The agreement comes after years of Iranian efforts to shift its petroleum ... more
Hagel Confirms No 3rd Senate Term -- Has 16 Months to Channel Eisenhower 
(painting of President Dwight Eisenhower by Mike Hagel; hanging in Senator Chuck Hagel's private Senate office)
Before he departs the Senate 16 months from now, Senator Chuck Hagel will have many opportunities to focus a national spotlight on the gaps in the foreign policy and national security course the country is on.
Hagel has 16 months to channel Eisenhower and to challenge in an Ike-inspired way those who aspire to live in the White House and those who surround Bush now to be far better stewards than they are being now of America's national security portfolio.
Hanging in Chuck Hagel's Senate office is a portrait of Dwight Eisenhower painted by his brother Mike. This article by John Judis tells the story of Chuck and his brothers -- particularly Tom who fought alongside him in Vietnam -- and is important to understand the Senator's decision-making DNA.
I think that the Senate will be far worse off without Hagel there to stand up to the brow-beating and recklessness from the Cheney wing of the Republican national security establishment, but I don't think Hagel will be disappearing at all from public service or Washington.
But 16 months in the Senate is still a long time. Hagel has responsibilities not just for Nebraska but for the country -- and hopefully will play a key role in preventing any new wars hatching while he still has access to the Senate floor and like any Senator can make the nuts and bolts of "unanimous consent" procedures a bit less unanimous.
Here is Chuck Hagel's formal statement made today:
Watch for fireworks from Hagel tomorrow in the Petraeus/Crocker hearings.
-- Steve Clemons
(painting of President Dwight Eisenhower by Mike Hagel; hanging in Senator Chuck Hagel's private Senate office)
Before he departs the Senate 16 months from now, Senator Chuck Hagel will have many opportunities to focus a national spotlight on the gaps in the foreign policy and national security course the country is on.
Hagel has 16 months to channel Eisenhower and to challenge in an Ike-inspired way those who aspire to live in the White House and those who surround Bush now to be far better stewards than they are being now of America's national security portfolio.
Hanging in Chuck Hagel's Senate office is a portrait of Dwight Eisenhower painted by his brother Mike. This article by John Judis tells the story of Chuck and his brothers -- particularly Tom who fought alongside him in Vietnam -- and is important to understand the Senator's decision-making DNA.
I think that the Senate will be far worse off without Hagel there to stand up to the brow-beating and recklessness from the Cheney wing of the Republican national security establishment, but I don't think Hagel will be disappearing at all from public service or Washington.
But 16 months in the Senate is still a long time. Hagel has responsibilities not just for Nebraska but for the country -- and hopefully will play a key role in preventing any new wars hatching while he still has access to the Senate floor and like any Senator can make the nuts and bolts of "unanimous consent" procedures a bit less unanimous.
Here is Chuck Hagel's formal statement made today:
I will not seek a third term in the United States Senate, nor do I intend to be a candidate for any office in 2008. It has been my greatest honor and privilege to serve my country and represent my fellow Nebraskans in the U.S. Senate. My family and I will be forever grateful for this opportunity and the trust placed in me by the people of Nebraska. It has enriched all of us. I have always tried to live up to the promise I made to the people of Nebraska the day I announced my intention to seek this Senate seat. On March 30, 1995 I said, "I intend to be a Senator all Nebraskans can be proud of." I hope I've done that, and made some contributions to our state and country along the way. History will sort that out.I think what really just happened in Hagel's statement is that he has just issued a warning to Cheney's people that even though he and they are out in 2008, he's going to do his best to keep them from further wrecking the military and degrading America's standing in the world.
I am proud of my Senate record and deeply grateful to all those who helped get me there and keep me there, and those who have worked so hard for the people of Nebraska -- my staff. I would like to particularly thank Mike McCarthy, Ken Stinson and Lou Ann Linehan. I owe a great deal to these three individuals.
I would have been unable to do my job without the love, wise perspective and constant encouragement of my wife Lilibet, my daughter Allyn and my son Ziller. My appreciation for their support is immeasurable. I would also like to thank my brothers, Tom and Mike, for their constant support and occasional brotherly constructive evaluations.
I said after I was elected in 1996 that 12 years in the Senate would probably be enough. It is. I have always believed that democracies work best when there is a constant cycle of new energy and ideas, and fresh leadership.
I will leave the Senate with the same enthusiasm, sense of purpose and love of my country that I started with. I leave maybe a little wiser, surely a little more experienced and with a very respectable amount of humility.
Public service has always been a big part of my life, and I hope to have another opportunity to serve my country in some new capacity down the road.
This afternoon, my family and I will return to Washington, and I will go back to work. I look forward to working as hard in the remaining 16 months of my Senate term for the people of Nebraska as I have over the last 11 years.
Thank you.
Watch for fireworks from Hagel tomorrow in the Petraeus/Crocker hearings.
-- Steve Clemons
Rumsfeld Disowns the War 
The former defense secretary graces the pages of October’s GQ (of all places) to make some bold assertions, claiming he was not a driving force behind the Iraq war and that he warned the president of many of the problems that have come to pass.
Another new Bin Laden tape released
A new tape from Osama Bin Laden has been released by As Sahab. The video is entitled "The Wills of the Heroes of the Raids on New York and Washington. The Will of the Martyr (as we see him) Abu Mus'ab al Shehri With a forward by Sheikh Osama bin Laden, may Allah protect him".
The video, 47 minutes 16 seconds in length, features an introduction by Osama Bin Laden. Bin Laden is shown in a still image, dressed as he was in last week's tape and apparently in the same location. An audio tape plays in the background. The still image is superimposed on news video footage of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center.
The video includes the will of "Abu Musab Waleed al-Shehri", one of the 9/11 hijackers.
Fading superpower?
Like all empires before it, the U.S. will slip from the top of the heap. Let's start getting ready.
By David Rieff
September 9, 2007
The Los Angeles Times
In Washington these days, people talk a lot about the collapse of the bipartisan foreign policy consensus that existed during the Cold War. But however bitter today's disputes are about Iraq or the prosecution of the so-called global war on terrorism, there is one bedrock assumption about foreign policy that remains truly bipartisan: The United States will remain the sole superpower, and the guarantor of international security and global trade, for the foreseeable future. In other words, whatever else may change in the decades to come, the 21st century will be every bit as much of an American century as the 20th.
This assumption rests, in turn, on two interrelated beliefs.
The first is that because no country or alliance of states has shown any great desire to challenge U.S. preeminence -- or demonstrated the means of doing so -- no country is going to. China's interests are regional at most, the argument goes, and the European Union is too divided, too unwilling or too weak to rebuild its once-formidable military machine. As for Russia, believers in the durability of a world order anchored in Washington insist that its declining population and excessive reliance on its energy wealth will in the long run preclude it from playing a central role in global affairs.
The second is that the world needs the U.S. and appreciates the role it plays. (In some versions of this argument, the world needs the U.S. far more than the U.S. needs the world.) If there have been no serious challenges to American hegemony to date, it is asserted, it is because the U.S. provides what are referred to by foreign policy analysts as "global goods": It maintains political and economic stability around the world, it guarantees a democratic capitalist world order and, by virtue of its unparalleled military strength, it acts as a world policeman of last resort.
Whatever the merits of this case, surely it is significant that it is most often made by U.S. policy analysts and government officials (as well as, to a lesser extent, by British officials). From Pax Romana through Pax Britannica to the current Pax Americana, empires have justified their own power by insisting that they were not simply serving their own interests but rather the common good. Looking back at the British imperial high-water mark of 1900, H.G. Wells wrote that "the sprawling British Empire still maintained a tradition of free trade, equal treatment and open-handedness to all comers round and about the planet."
Such confidence in Britain's fundamental benignity as an empire is matched today by figures across the American political spectrum, from Barack Obama to Rudy Giuliani, from the conservative policy analyst Robert Kagan to the liberal academic Michael Mandelbaum. Whatever their other, substantial differences, all seem convinced that the world works best with the United States at the helm, and that without American leadership, the world would soon become more dangerous and anarchic and less prosperous.
Indeed, if they are to be believed, the only serious threat to U.S. hegemony visible anywhere on the horizon is the American people's potential unwillingness to support their country as it plays this role.
But what if the Americans who hold these beliefs are not, in fact, clear-eyed observers of the world scene stripped of its anti-imperial mystifications? Instead, what if they are people who have fallen for the same self-delusion that the British ruling class entertained before World War I, which was that their empire was so essential to world stability and, at least when compared with the alternatives and with empires past, so just that its hegemony could and would weather all challenges?
It is hardly farfetched to scan the historical record and conclude that self-love and imperialism go together, whether it was the British imperialist Cecil Rhodes insisting that British colonialism in Africa had been "philanthropy plus 5%" or President Bush insisting that it was America's special mission to spread democracy throughout the world. But what the historical record also shows is that imperial moments are, in fact, fleeting, and that hegemony has a shorter and shorter shelf life. The Roman Empire lasted more than 700 years (more than a millennium if you count the Byzantines); the British Empire lasted a little more than 300 years in India and less than a century in much of Africa. The economic challenges facing the U.S. at least suggest that America's time as sole superpower could be shorter still.
Americans, who grow up believing in their country's exceptionalism (which in foreign policy terms often seems to mean not believing that the historical constraints that apply to other nations apply to the U.S.), are not predisposed to believe that American predominance could possibly be coming to an end. And yet it seems more like wishful thinking than rational analysis to believe that the United States -- which in the coming decades will certainly have to adapt to a multipolar world in geo-economic terms, as China and India reoccupy the central place in the global economy that they had 500 years ago -- can continue indefinitely to play a hegemonic role.
The truth is that whether it is imperial Rome, imperial Spain or imperial Britain, economic strength and political strength have always gone together. Because no one denies that the U.S. will decline in comparative terms economically (though it will almost certainly remain one center of the world economy), the only way one can believe that geopolitics will not also become multipolar is to believe that the U.S. is somehow exempt from what seems one of history's few ironclad laws. And that is not analysis; that is faith.
The war in Iraq has demonstrated the limits of even America's vaunted military strength -- the one arena in which the U.S. is likely to remain supreme for decades to come. In an era of asymmetric threats, conventional military power is rapidly becoming an anachronistic measure of a country's strength.
None of this is to say that the U.S. will not continue to be one of the most important powers -- only that its days of first dictating and then guaranteeing the rules are numbered in an era in which it has become a debtor nation. In any case, the post-World War II structures of international governance are crumbling -- as well they might after more than six decades. Everyone knows they need to be revised.
For the moment, the U.S. is the sole superpower. But instead of deluding ourselves that we will go on that way into the indeterminate future, an intelligently self-interested foreign policy would have us do everything in our power to shape, according to our most urgent priorities, the international rules that will govern relations between states after the American moment has passed -- as it inevitably will.
The alternative is to go the route of the British before 1914 and imagine that because a certain set of political arrangements seems best to us, they must also be best for the world -- and destined to endure indefinitely. The real choice that confronts us is not between a second American century and anarchy but between a multipolar world in which we will play an important role and an anti-American century.
David Rieff is the author of many books, including "At the Point of a Gun: Democratic Dreams and Armed Intervention" and "A Bed for the Night: Humanitarianism in Crisis."
Like all empires before it, the U.S. will slip from the top of the heap. Let's start getting ready.
By David Rieff
September 9, 2007
The Los Angeles Times
In Washington these days, people talk a lot about the collapse of the bipartisan foreign policy consensus that existed during the Cold War. But however bitter today's disputes are about Iraq or the prosecution of the so-called global war on terrorism, there is one bedrock assumption about foreign policy that remains truly bipartisan: The United States will remain the sole superpower, and the guarantor of international security and global trade, for the foreseeable future. In other words, whatever else may change in the decades to come, the 21st century will be every bit as much of an American century as the 20th.
This assumption rests, in turn, on two interrelated beliefs.
The first is that because no country or alliance of states has shown any great desire to challenge U.S. preeminence -- or demonstrated the means of doing so -- no country is going to. China's interests are regional at most, the argument goes, and the European Union is too divided, too unwilling or too weak to rebuild its once-formidable military machine. As for Russia, believers in the durability of a world order anchored in Washington insist that its declining population and excessive reliance on its energy wealth will in the long run preclude it from playing a central role in global affairs.
The second is that the world needs the U.S. and appreciates the role it plays. (In some versions of this argument, the world needs the U.S. far more than the U.S. needs the world.) If there have been no serious challenges to American hegemony to date, it is asserted, it is because the U.S. provides what are referred to by foreign policy analysts as "global goods": It maintains political and economic stability around the world, it guarantees a democratic capitalist world order and, by virtue of its unparalleled military strength, it acts as a world policeman of last resort.
Whatever the merits of this case, surely it is significant that it is most often made by U.S. policy analysts and government officials (as well as, to a lesser extent, by British officials). From Pax Romana through Pax Britannica to the current Pax Americana, empires have justified their own power by insisting that they were not simply serving their own interests but rather the common good. Looking back at the British imperial high-water mark of 1900, H.G. Wells wrote that "the sprawling British Empire still maintained a tradition of free trade, equal treatment and open-handedness to all comers round and about the planet."
Such confidence in Britain's fundamental benignity as an empire is matched today by figures across the American political spectrum, from Barack Obama to Rudy Giuliani, from the conservative policy analyst Robert Kagan to the liberal academic Michael Mandelbaum. Whatever their other, substantial differences, all seem convinced that the world works best with the United States at the helm, and that without American leadership, the world would soon become more dangerous and anarchic and less prosperous.
Indeed, if they are to be believed, the only serious threat to U.S. hegemony visible anywhere on the horizon is the American people's potential unwillingness to support their country as it plays this role.
But what if the Americans who hold these beliefs are not, in fact, clear-eyed observers of the world scene stripped of its anti-imperial mystifications? Instead, what if they are people who have fallen for the same self-delusion that the British ruling class entertained before World War I, which was that their empire was so essential to world stability and, at least when compared with the alternatives and with empires past, so just that its hegemony could and would weather all challenges?
It is hardly farfetched to scan the historical record and conclude that self-love and imperialism go together, whether it was the British imperialist Cecil Rhodes insisting that British colonialism in Africa had been "philanthropy plus 5%" or President Bush insisting that it was America's special mission to spread democracy throughout the world. But what the historical record also shows is that imperial moments are, in fact, fleeting, and that hegemony has a shorter and shorter shelf life. The Roman Empire lasted more than 700 years (more than a millennium if you count the Byzantines); the British Empire lasted a little more than 300 years in India and less than a century in much of Africa. The economic challenges facing the U.S. at least suggest that America's time as sole superpower could be shorter still.
Americans, who grow up believing in their country's exceptionalism (which in foreign policy terms often seems to mean not believing that the historical constraints that apply to other nations apply to the U.S.), are not predisposed to believe that American predominance could possibly be coming to an end. And yet it seems more like wishful thinking than rational analysis to believe that the United States -- which in the coming decades will certainly have to adapt to a multipolar world in geo-economic terms, as China and India reoccupy the central place in the global economy that they had 500 years ago -- can continue indefinitely to play a hegemonic role.
The truth is that whether it is imperial Rome, imperial Spain or imperial Britain, economic strength and political strength have always gone together. Because no one denies that the U.S. will decline in comparative terms economically (though it will almost certainly remain one center of the world economy), the only way one can believe that geopolitics will not also become multipolar is to believe that the U.S. is somehow exempt from what seems one of history's few ironclad laws. And that is not analysis; that is faith.
The war in Iraq has demonstrated the limits of even America's vaunted military strength -- the one arena in which the U.S. is likely to remain supreme for decades to come. In an era of asymmetric threats, conventional military power is rapidly becoming an anachronistic measure of a country's strength.
None of this is to say that the U.S. will not continue to be one of the most important powers -- only that its days of first dictating and then guaranteeing the rules are numbered in an era in which it has become a debtor nation. In any case, the post-World War II structures of international governance are crumbling -- as well they might after more than six decades. Everyone knows they need to be revised.
For the moment, the U.S. is the sole superpower. But instead of deluding ourselves that we will go on that way into the indeterminate future, an intelligently self-interested foreign policy would have us do everything in our power to shape, according to our most urgent priorities, the international rules that will govern relations between states after the American moment has passed -- as it inevitably will.
The alternative is to go the route of the British before 1914 and imagine that because a certain set of political arrangements seems best to us, they must also be best for the world -- and destined to endure indefinitely. The real choice that confronts us is not between a second American century and anarchy but between a multipolar world in which we will play an important role and an anti-American century.
David Rieff is the author of many books, including "At the Point of a Gun: Democratic Dreams and Armed Intervention" and "A Bed for the Night: Humanitarianism in Crisis."
etraeus calls for gradual drawdown
By Julian E. Barnes
He would pull some troops out of Iraq now, but he wouldn't reach pre-'surge'
levels before next summer.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvUy0EN
Deportation of Musharraf foe bodes ill, analysts say
By Laura King
They now see a greater risk that the Pakistani leader will impose martial law.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvUz0EO
By Julian E. Barnes
He would pull some troops out of Iraq now, but he wouldn't reach pre-'surge'
levels before next summer.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvUy0EN
Deportation of Musharraf foe bodes ill, analysts say
By Laura King
They now see a greater risk that the Pakistani leader will impose martial law.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvUz0EO
Bush policy to bequeath Iraq to successor
By Paul Richter
The president plans to end his term with a strong U.S. military in the country
and leave the issue of exiting to his successor.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvU30ED
By Paul Richter
The president plans to end his term with a strong U.S. military in the country
and leave the issue of exiting to his successor.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvU30ED
Petraeus' report is a potential minefield for both parties
By Noam N. Levey and Richard Simon
Democrats may lose momentum in their push for a big pullout; the GOP could face
public anger over the troops that stayed.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVA0ES
Post-9/11, 'safer today' but 'not safe'
By Josh Meyer
Four of the United States' top counter-terrorism officials testify to a Senate
panel before the sixth anniversary of the attacks.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVB0ET
By Noam N. Levey and Richard Simon
Democrats may lose momentum in their push for a big pullout; the GOP could face
public anger over the troops that stayed.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVA0ES
Post-9/11, 'safer today' but 'not safe'
By Josh Meyer
Four of the United States' top counter-terrorism officials testify to a Senate
panel before the sixth anniversary of the attacks.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVB0ET
__
Among Arab nations, an atmosphere on edge
By Jeffrey Fleishman
Recent squabbles between Syria and Saudi Arabia highlight increased differences,
while Iran's behavior unnerves many.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVC0EU
Chinese woman has 26 needles in body
By Ching-ching Ni
Relatives suspect her grandfather, who wanted a grandson. Surgery is scheduled
for today to remove 6 of the objects.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVD0EV
6 pipelines blown up in Mexico
By Reed Johnson
Oil and natural gas conduits are targeted in what appears to be politically
motivated sabotage. Blasts force 15,000 to evacuate.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVE0EW
Among Arab nations, an atmosphere on edge
By Jeffrey Fleishman
Recent squabbles between Syria and Saudi Arabia highlight increased differences,
while Iran's behavior unnerves many.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVC0EU
Chinese woman has 26 needles in body
By Ching-ching Ni
Relatives suspect her grandfather, who wanted a grandson. Surgery is scheduled
for today to remove 6 of the objects.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVD0EV
6 pipelines blown up in Mexico
By Reed Johnson
Oil and natural gas conduits are targeted in what appears to be politically
motivated sabotage. Blasts force 15,000 to evacuate.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVE0EW
The real 'blowback' behind Osama
By Jonah Goldberg
Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan empowered Osama bin Laden's Islamist forces;
ours from Iraq would do the same.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVQ0Ei
By Jonah Goldberg
Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan empowered Osama bin Laden's Islamist forces;
ours from Iraq would do the same.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVQ0Ei
The how behind Bush's power grab
By Bill Boyarsky
John W. Dean explains the process in which an idea becomes practice in the
current presidential administration.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvVM0Ee
NRO's recap. Six Years Ago, From September 2001
IRAQ NEWS ROUNDUP W. Thomas Smth Jr., The Tank
Terror attacks were an act of war, not simply a tragedy to be mourned. Debra Burlingame, New York Daily News
Why New York hasn't been attacked again. Judith Miller, London Telegraph
MoveOn reaches a new low. Ralph Peters, New York Post
Al Qaeda still plots another U.S. attack. Bill Gertz, Washington Times
Red terror, Green terror: Anti-Americanism is the common thread. Bret Stephens, Wall Street Journal
IRAN NEWS ROUNDUP Michael Rubin, The Corner
9/11: Six Years Later
Q&A: Norman Podhoretz talks about President Bush & World War IV. “A Real Neocon Speaks” 09/11 12:00 AM
JOSEPH LIEBERMAN: Will this be the moment in history when America gives up? “Washington’s Civilizational Choice” 09/11 7:35 AM
MELANIE PHILLIPS: Have we learned nothing? “Denial, England” 09/11 7:15 AM
VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: September 11 was not the first and won’t be the last terrorist assault on our citizens and culture. “Lessons in War” 09/11 12:00 AM
MICHAEL O'BRIEN: The Freedom Walk commemorates 9/11 across the country. “A Walk to Remember” 09/11 12:13 AM
CARTER ANDRESS: Six years in, Iraq is center stage for the international jihadist movement. “The Connection” 09/11 4:00 AM
MACKUBIN THOMAS OWENS: The war is over when the loser, not the winner, says it is. “Dismantling Terrorism” 09/11 12:00 AM
ELAINE DONNELLY: Bush should take steps to boost troop readiness. “America’s Depleted Army” 09/11 12:00 AM
Q&A: Norman Podhoretz talks about President Bush & World War IV. “A Real Neocon Speaks” 09/11 12:00 AM
JOSEPH LIEBERMAN: Will this be the moment in history when America gives up? “Washington’s Civilizational Choice” 09/11 7:35 AM
MELANIE PHILLIPS: Have we learned nothing? “Denial, England” 09/11 7:15 AM
VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: September 11 was not the first and won’t be the last terrorist assault on our citizens and culture. “Lessons in War” 09/11 12:00 AM
MICHAEL O'BRIEN: The Freedom Walk commemorates 9/11 across the country. “A Walk to Remember” 09/11 12:13 AM
CARTER ANDRESS: Six years in, Iraq is center stage for the international jihadist movement. “The Connection” 09/11 4:00 AM
MACKUBIN THOMAS OWENS: The war is over when the loser, not the winner, says it is. “Dismantling Terrorism” 09/11 12:00 AM
ELAINE DONNELLY: Bush should take steps to boost troop readiness. “America’s Depleted Army” 09/11 12:00 AM
Sheikh Osama and the iPod general
Both Osama bin Laden and General David Petraeus aim to seduce multiple layers of constituencies, but above all US public opinion. The al-Qaeda leader revels in what he views as the United States' failed imperial project and promotes a global "protest movement". Washington's top man in Iraq still sees success in the "surge". How different things might have been had Petraeus been set loose on bin Laden's trail six years ago. - Pepe Escobar (Sep 11, '07)
A cut in Iraq, but definitely no running
US commander in Iraq General David Petraeus painted a predictably positive picture of the situation in the country during a report to the US Congress, indicating a reduction of troops to pre-"surge" levels by next summer. Iraqi political conciliation is another matter. (Sep 11, '07)
Both Osama bin Laden and General David Petraeus aim to seduce multiple layers of constituencies, but above all US public opinion. The al-Qaeda leader revels in what he views as the United States' failed imperial project and promotes a global "protest movement". Washington's top man in Iraq still sees success in the "surge". How different things might have been had Petraeus been set loose on bin Laden's trail six years ago. - Pepe Escobar (Sep 11, '07) A cut in Iraq, but definitely no running
US commander in Iraq General David Petraeus painted a predictably positive picture of the situation in the country during a report to the US Congress, indicating a reduction of troops to pre-"surge" levels by next summer. Iraqi political conciliation is another matter. (Sep 11, '07)
Syria and Israel flirt with war
Both Syria and Israel repeatedly state that they want peace, not war, but last week's incident in which four Israeli warplanes invaded Syrian airspace markedly lowers the odds on hostilities. Jerusalem has remained steadfastly silent over the incursion, leaving Damascus to draw its own conclusion that all options are on the table. - Sami Moubayed (Sep 11, '07)
Both Syria and Israel repeatedly state that they want peace, not war, but last week's incident in which four Israeli warplanes invaded Syrian airspace markedly lowers the odds on hostilities. Jerusalem has remained steadfastly silent over the incursion, leaving Damascus to draw its own conclusion that all options are on the table. - Sami Moubayed (Sep 11, '07)
US may attack, but will Iran fight back?
The vital question in the unfolding US-Iran crisis is not whether the Americans plan to attack Iran, since they are clearly itching to do so, but what response would follow. The conventional Iraqi armed forces were easily broken, but a sectarian guerrilla war is still raging more than four years later. Similarly, the Iranian armed forces might be crippled, but the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and other forces might continue the fight for years. - Alan G Jamieson (Sep 11, '07)
Anti-Iran hype reaches fever pitch
It appears Iran will remain a target for neo-con ideologues and their ilk for months to come. The question remains as to whether this aggressive pseudo-policy will yield a positive outcome, or if it will end, as many in the international community believe, in military confrontation. (Sep 11, '07)
The vital question in the unfolding US-Iran crisis is not whether the Americans plan to attack Iran, since they are clearly itching to do so, but what response would follow. The conventional Iraqi armed forces were easily broken, but a sectarian guerrilla war is still raging more than four years later. Similarly, the Iranian armed forces might be crippled, but the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and other forces might continue the fight for years. - Alan G Jamieson (Sep 11, '07)
Anti-Iran hype reaches fever pitch
It appears Iran will remain a target for neo-con ideologues and their ilk for months to come. The question remains as to whether this aggressive pseudo-policy will yield a positive outcome, or if it will end, as many in the international community believe, in military confrontation. (Sep 11, '07)
Six Years After 9/11, Why We're Losing the War on Terror
David Cole, Jules Lobel, The Nation
War on Iraq: How Bush & Co. have taken the U.S. from being the object of the world's sympathy to the object of their scorn.
Six Years of 9/11 as a License to KillNorman Solomon, AlterNet
War on Iraq: Thanks to the military-industrial -media complex, Americans view humanity through red-white -and-blue windows on the world.
Reality vs. Petraeus [VIDEO]
Post by Cliff Schecter
Video: Top national security experts including Richard Clarke and Rand Beers are interviewed about the "Petraeus" report. More »
MoveOn's Anti-Petraeus Ad Angers Everyone . . . Except Public
AOL News Newsbloggers, VA - Sep 10, 2007
The liberal activist organization MoveOn.org ran a full-page ad in the New York Times today that reads, "General Petraeus or General Betray Us? ...
How Right-Wing Lie About MoveOn Ad Became The Story Yahoo! News
Gen. David Petraeus deserves an apology Kansas City Star
The Assault on Petraeus Washington Post
Washington Times - Arizona Daily Star
all 127 news articles »
AOL News Newsbloggers, VA - Sep 10, 2007
The liberal activist organization MoveOn.org ran a full-page ad in the New York Times today that reads, "General Petraeus or General Betray Us? ...
How Right-Wing Lie About MoveOn Ad Became The Story Yahoo! News
Gen. David Petraeus deserves an apology Kansas City Star
The Assault on Petraeus Washington Post
Washington Times - Arizona Daily Star
all 127 news articles »
• "Rule of Law, Politics and Nuclear Non-Proliferation," By Pierre Goldschmidt, Carnegie Analysis
• "Reinvigorate Nuclear Nonproliferation," By Jessica T. Mathews, Democracy: A Journal of Ideas
• "Atomic Renaissance," The Economist
• "Iran, Russia Still Talking on Nuclear Plant Completion," Agence France-Press
• "ElBaradei Defends Nuclear Plan With Iran," By Greg Webb, Global Security Newswire
• "Bush Offers North Korea a Deal to End the World's Oldest Cold War," By Jonathan Watts and Justin McCurry, The Guardian
• "India Developing Submarine Launched Baillistic Missiles," International Herald Tribune
• "Reinvigorate Nuclear Nonproliferation," By Jessica T. Mathews, Democracy: A Journal of Ideas
• "Atomic Renaissance," The Economist
• "Iran, Russia Still Talking on Nuclear Plant Completion," Agence France-Press
• "ElBaradei Defends Nuclear Plan With Iran," By Greg Webb, Global Security Newswire
• "Bush Offers North Korea a Deal to End the World's Oldest Cold War," By Jonathan Watts and Justin McCurry, The Guardian
• "India Developing Submarine Launched Baillistic Missiles," International Herald Tribune
George Shultz on the Israel lobby, excerpted from his introduction to Abe Foxman's book The Deadliest Lies: The Israel Lobby and the Myth of Jewish Control. His critique of the Walt/Mearsheimer and Carter books seems to have more to do with the books as he imagines them than as they actually are. U.S. News & World Report
Opinion
The 'Israel Lobby' Myth
By George P. Shultz
Posted September 9, 2007
Israel is a free, democratic, open, and relentlessly self-analytical place. To hear harsh criticism of Israel's policies and leaders, listen to the Israelis. So questioning Israel for its actions is legitimate, but lies are something else. Throughout human history, they have been used not only to vilify but to establish a basis for cruel and inhuman acts. The catalog of lies about Jews is long and astonishingly crude, matched only by the suffering that has followed their promulgation.
Defaming the Jews by disputing their rightful place among the peoples of the world has been a long-running, well-documented, and disgraceful series of episodes across history. Again and again a time has come when legitimate criticism slips across an invisible line into what might be called the "badlands," a place where those who should be regarded as worthy adversaries in debate are turned into scapegoats, targets, all-purpose objects of blame.
In America, we protect all speech, even the most hurtful lies. We allow a virtual free-for-all by which laws are adopted, enforced, and interpreted. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent yearly to influence this process; thousands of groups vie for influence. Among these are Jewish groups that have come under renewed criticism for being part of an all-powerful "Israel lobby," most notably in a book published this week by Profs. Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer.
Jewish groups are influential. They also largely agree that the United States should support Israel. But the notion that they have anything like a uniform agenda and that U.S. policy in Israel and the Middle East is the result of this influence is simply wrong.
One choice. Some critics seem overly impressed with the way of thinking that says to itself, "Since there is a huge Arab Islamic world out there with all the oil, and it is opposed to this tiny little Israel with no natural resources, then realistically the United States has to be on the Arab side and against Israel on every issue, and since this isn't the case, there must be some underhanded Jewish plot at work." This is a conspiracy theory, pure and simple.
Another tried and true method for damaging the well-being and security of the Jewish people and the State of Israel is a dangerously false analogy. Witness former President Jimmy Carter's book Palestine—Peace Not Apartheid. Here the association on the one hand is between Israel's existentially threatened position and the measures it has taken to protect its population from terrorist attacks, driven by an ideology bent on the complete eradication of the State of Israel, and, on the other, the racist oppression of South Africa's black population by the white Boer regime.
The tendency of mind that lies behind such repulsive analogies remains and is reinforced by the former president's views, spread across his book, which come down on the anti-Israel side of every case. These false analogies stir up and lend legitimacy to more widely based movements that take the same dangerous direction.
Anyone who thinks that Jewish groups constitute a homogeneous "lobby" ought to spend some time dealing with them. For example, my decision to open a dialogue with Yasser Arafat after he met certain conditions evoked a wide spectrum of responses from the government of Israel, its political parties, and American Jewish groups who weighed in on one side or the other. Other examples in which the United States rejected Israel's view of an issue, or the view of the American Jewish community, include the sale of arms to Saudi Arabia and President Reagan's decision to go to the cemetery at Bitburg, Germany.
The United States supports Israel not because of favoritism based on political pressure or influence but because the American people, and their leaders, say that supporting Israel is politically sound and morally just.
We are a great nation. Mostly, we make good decisions. We are not babes in the woods. We act in our own interests. And when we mistakenly conclude from time to time—as we will—that an action or policy is in America's interest, we must take responsibility for the mistake.
So, on every level, those who blame Israel and its Jewish supporters for U.S. policies they do not support are wrong. They are wrong because, to begin with, support for Israel is in our best interests. They are also wrong because Israel and its supporters have the right to try to influence U.S. policy. And they are wrong because the U.S. government is responsible for the policies it adopts, not any other state or any of the myriad lobbies and groups that battle daily—sometimes with lies—to win America's support.
George Shultz was secretary of state from 1982 to 1989. This is excerpted from his introduction to The Deadliest Lies: The Israel Lobby and the Myth of Jewish Control by Abraham Foxman (Palgrave Macmillan).
LOS ANGELES TIMES
9/11/07
Bush policy to bequeath Iraq to successor
The president plans to end his term with a strong U.S. military in the country and leave the issue of exiting to his successor.
Paul Richter
WASHINGTON — -- The talk in Washington on Monday was all about troop reductions, yet it also brought into sharp focus President Bush's plans to end his term with a strong U.S. military presence in Iraq, and to leave tough decisions about ending the unpopular war to his successor.
The plans outlined by the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, would retain a large force in the country -- perhaps more than 100,000 troops -- when the time comes for Bush to move out of the White House in January 2009.
The plans also would allow Bush to live up to his pledge to the defining mission of his presidency, and perhaps to improve his chances for a decent legacy. He can say he left office pursuing a strategy that was having at least some success in suppressing violence, a claim that some historians may view sympathetically.
"Bush has found his exit strategy," said Kenneth M. Pollack, a former government Mideast specialist now at the Brookings Institution. As Petraeus met with lawmakers and unveiled chart upon chart showing declining troop levels, the U.S. commander seemed to have opened a new discussion about how the United States would wind up its commitment to Iraq. Yet viewed more closely, his presentation, and that of U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, were better suited to the defense of an earlier strategy: "stay the course."
Petraeus said the government might be able to consider withdrawing some troops below pre-"surge" levels under some circumstances. But Crocker's emphasis was on how long it would take Iraq to chart its new path, and on the necessity for American support into this dim and distant future.
Crocker suggested that despite American griping about the halting progress of the Iraq government, Prime Minister Nouri Maliki and his rivals might not be moving so slowly by historical standards. After all, it took Americans centuries to settle issues like slavery and local rights, he pointed out.
The process of Iraq's emergence "will not be quick, it will be uneven, punctuated by setbacks as well as achievements, and it will require substantial U.S. resolve and commitment," Crocker said.
"There will be no single moment at which we can claim victory; any turning point will likely only be recognized in retrospect. . . . It will take a lot of work, and it will take time," he said.
Crocker said nothing about reducing the U.S. commitment. Indeed, four years after Bush stood under a banner declaring "Mission Accomplished," Crocker said U.S. economic aid to Iraq, which had been in decline, would be broadened with a new infrastructure "trust fund" and an "Iraqi-American Enterprise Fund" to buy stock in new and reshaped Iraqi companies.
One State Department official recalled that before the 2003 invasion, Crocker "warned that it would probably take 10 years to stabilize Iraq. And that's about what it's going to take -- 10 years."
Bush's approach also gives some support to Republican allies on Capitol Hill who have been anxious about entering the 2008 election season carrying responsibility for the war.
Now the Republicans will be able to claim that the war is winding down and the troops coming home, even if fewer than 20% are scheduled to return in the next year.
Bush was even able to oblige Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia, senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, who asked for a brigade to come home before Christmas.
But while Petraeus and Crocker made the administration's general goals clear, it left uncertain their thinking on a variety of key issues.
Nothing new was said, for example, on how the administration intends to try to break apart the governmental gridlock in Baghdad, which has obstructed the administration's plan to bring about national reconciliation through agreements by the national government. Does the administration want to try to overhaul the badly balkanized government, or empower the local governments?
Also unanswered was what course the administration will take if it turns out that fewer U.S. forces are unable to maintain the current level of security when the five brigades leave by summer.
Those issues most likely will be left for the next president, whose new job is looking tougher all the time.
9/11/07
Bush policy to bequeath Iraq to successor
The president plans to end his term with a strong U.S. military in the country and leave the issue of exiting to his successor.
Paul Richter
WASHINGTON — -- The talk in Washington on Monday was all about troop reductions, yet it also brought into sharp focus President Bush's plans to end his term with a strong U.S. military presence in Iraq, and to leave tough decisions about ending the unpopular war to his successor.
The plans outlined by the U.S. commander in Iraq, Gen. David H. Petraeus, would retain a large force in the country -- perhaps more than 100,000 troops -- when the time comes for Bush to move out of the White House in January 2009.
The plans also would allow Bush to live up to his pledge to the defining mission of his presidency, and perhaps to improve his chances for a decent legacy. He can say he left office pursuing a strategy that was having at least some success in suppressing violence, a claim that some historians may view sympathetically.
"Bush has found his exit strategy," said Kenneth M. Pollack, a former government Mideast specialist now at the Brookings Institution. As Petraeus met with lawmakers and unveiled chart upon chart showing declining troop levels, the U.S. commander seemed to have opened a new discussion about how the United States would wind up its commitment to Iraq. Yet viewed more closely, his presentation, and that of U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, were better suited to the defense of an earlier strategy: "stay the course."
Petraeus said the government might be able to consider withdrawing some troops below pre-"surge" levels under some circumstances. But Crocker's emphasis was on how long it would take Iraq to chart its new path, and on the necessity for American support into this dim and distant future.
Crocker suggested that despite American griping about the halting progress of the Iraq government, Prime Minister Nouri Maliki and his rivals might not be moving so slowly by historical standards. After all, it took Americans centuries to settle issues like slavery and local rights, he pointed out.
The process of Iraq's emergence "will not be quick, it will be uneven, punctuated by setbacks as well as achievements, and it will require substantial U.S. resolve and commitment," Crocker said.
"There will be no single moment at which we can claim victory; any turning point will likely only be recognized in retrospect. . . . It will take a lot of work, and it will take time," he said.
Crocker said nothing about reducing the U.S. commitment. Indeed, four years after Bush stood under a banner declaring "Mission Accomplished," Crocker said U.S. economic aid to Iraq, which had been in decline, would be broadened with a new infrastructure "trust fund" and an "Iraqi-American Enterprise Fund" to buy stock in new and reshaped Iraqi companies.
One State Department official recalled that before the 2003 invasion, Crocker "warned that it would probably take 10 years to stabilize Iraq. And that's about what it's going to take -- 10 years."
Bush's approach also gives some support to Republican allies on Capitol Hill who have been anxious about entering the 2008 election season carrying responsibility for the war.
Now the Republicans will be able to claim that the war is winding down and the troops coming home, even if fewer than 20% are scheduled to return in the next year.
Bush was even able to oblige Sen. John W. Warner of Virginia, senior Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, who asked for a brigade to come home before Christmas.
But while Petraeus and Crocker made the administration's general goals clear, it left uncertain their thinking on a variety of key issues.
Nothing new was said, for example, on how the administration intends to try to break apart the governmental gridlock in Baghdad, which has obstructed the administration's plan to bring about national reconciliation through agreements by the national government. Does the administration want to try to overhaul the badly balkanized government, or empower the local governments?
Also unanswered was what course the administration will take if it turns out that fewer U.S. forces are unable to maintain the current level of security when the five brigades leave by summer.
Those issues most likely will be left for the next president, whose new job is looking tougher all the time.
Giuliani's support is soft in key states
By Janet Hook and Peter Wallsten
Though the former N.Y. mayor leads the GOP field nationwide, a poll shows him
trailing in three early-voting states. Clinton maintains a solid lead among
Democrats.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpn0EG
U.S. seeks pact with Shiite militia
By Ned Parker
The military is in talks with elements of cleric Sadr's powerful group, which is
accused of attacks against soldiers, but which holds sway in much of Baghdad and
parts of Iraq.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpo0EH
By Janet Hook and Peter Wallsten
Though the former N.Y. mayor leads the GOP field nationwide, a poll shows him
trailing in three early-voting states. Clinton maintains a solid lead among
Democrats.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpn0EG
U.S. seeks pact with Shiite militia
By Ned Parker
The military is in talks with elements of cleric Sadr's powerful group, which is
accused of attacks against soldiers, but which holds sway in much of Baghdad and
parts of Iraq.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpo0EH
In tune with Taiwan
By David Pierson
Heavy metal band wins emigre fans on U.S. tour urging U.N. recognition, but some
worry that message isn't reaching American audiences.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpp0EI
A mother remembers 9/11
By Erika Hayasaki
As others talk of moving on, Carol Ashley pays her annual visit to the place
where her Janice died.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpq0EJ
By David Pierson
Heavy metal band wins emigre fans on U.S. tour urging U.N. recognition, but some
worry that message isn't reaching American audiences.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpp0EI
A mother remembers 9/11
By Erika Hayasaki
As others talk of moving on, Carol Ashley pays her annual visit to the place
where her Janice died.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpq0EJ
Iraq progress report fails to win over Senate
By Julian E. Barnes and Noam N. Levey
Worried GOP lawmakers facing reelection next year may have opened a door to
Democrats seeking a new war strategy.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpr0EK
By Julian E. Barnes and Noam N. Levey
Worried GOP lawmakers facing reelection next year may have opened a door to
Democrats seeking a new war strategy.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpr0EK
Campaigns feel the effects of Hsu case
By Dan Morain and Tom Hamburger
Clinton and Edwards plan to conduct criminal background checks on major donors.
And more money will be returned.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpx0EQ
By Dan Morain and Tom Hamburger
Clinton and Edwards plan to conduct criminal background checks on major donors.
And more money will be returned.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivpx0EQ
Pakistani opposition goes to court over deportation
By Laura King
The petition on Sharif's forcible removal is seen as a broader campaign to
topple Musharraf.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp10EF
Ukrainian president critical of Russia
By David Holley
Yushchenko claims Moscow is protecting suspects in his 2004 poisoning.
Ambassador is 'surprised' to hear of such accusations.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp20EG
Guerrilla group claims Pemex bombings
By María Antonieta Uribe and Héctor Tobar
The leftist Popular Revolutionary Army says it attacked six pipelines to force
Mexico to return two missing militants.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp30EH
By Laura King
The petition on Sharif's forcible removal is seen as a broader campaign to
topple Musharraf.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp10EF
Ukrainian president critical of Russia
By David Holley
Yushchenko claims Moscow is protecting suspects in his 2004 poisoning.
Ambassador is 'surprised' to hear of such accusations.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp20EG
Guerrilla group claims Pemex bombings
By María Antonieta Uribe and Héctor Tobar
The leftist Popular Revolutionary Army says it attacked six pipelines to force
Mexico to return two missing militants.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp30EH
Economy will hover near recession, forecast says
By Lisa Girion
Growth will be below 2% through the first quarter of 2008, according to a UCLA
report.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp50EJ
By Lisa Girion
Growth will be below 2% through the first quarter of 2008, according to a UCLA
report.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0Ivp50EJ
Iraqis have mixed feelings on U.S. progress report
By Tina Susman
Such varying opinions point to the wide divide in attitudes on politics and the
American presence.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvqI0Ee
{Use the A.G. appointment to pick a fight} {Rather than try to mollify
Democrats, the president should reinforce his relevance by selecting a
law-and-order attorney general.}
By Richard A. Viguerie
When you're running behind, that's when to quit. That's the message the
president is getting from those who urge him to make a go-along-to-get-along
appointment to replace Alberto R. Gonzales as attorney general. His decision may
be announced as early as today.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvqJ0Ef
Partisan bickering won't end the war
By Ronald Brownstein
How can Americans lecture Iraqis about 'reconciliation' when we can't even
manage it at home?
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvqK0Eg
By Tina Susman
Such varying opinions point to the wide divide in attitudes on politics and the
American presence.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvqI0Ee
{Use the A.G. appointment to pick a fight} {Rather than try to mollify
Democrats, the president should reinforce his relevance by selecting a
law-and-order attorney general.}
By Richard A. Viguerie
When you're running behind, that's when to quit. That's the message the
president is getting from those who urge him to make a go-along-to-get-along
appointment to replace Alberto R. Gonzales as attorney general. His decision may
be announced as early as today.
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvqJ0Ef
Partisan bickering won't end the war
By Ronald Brownstein
How can Americans lecture Iraqis about 'reconciliation' when we can't even
manage it at home?
http://email.latimes.com/cgi-bin1/DM/y/eBX...Io30G2B0IvqK0Eg
To Tell The Truth
by Ray McGovern, TomPaine.com
Petreaus should have been asked to testify under oath to the House.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
by Michael Winship, Messenger Post Newspapers
The Petraeus hearings may go down as the most fraudulent road tour since Milli Vanilli.
by Ray McGovern, TomPaine.com
Petreaus should have been asked to testify under oath to the House.
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics
by Michael Winship, Messenger Post Newspapers
The Petraeus hearings may go down as the most fraudulent road tour since Milli Vanilli.
Israel Conducted Air Strike Inside Syria Agence France-Presse Israel carried out a rare air strike inside Syria last week targeting a shipment of arms, CNN reported Tuesday quoting US government and military sources. C
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18361.htm
9/11 As A License To Kill By Norman Solomon From the outset, the warfare state has exploited "9/11," a label at once too facile and too laden with historic weight -- giving further power to the tacit political axiom that perception is reality.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18354.htm === 9-11, Six Years Later By Paul Craig Roberts When faced with disturbing events, the Romans asked a question, "Cui bono?" Who benefits? This question was conspicuously absent from the official investigation.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18353.htm
Remembering The Atrocities Of 9/11 - 34 Years Ago By NY Transfer Some of us have been marking the atrocities of September 11 for 34 years. On September 11, 1973, Nixon, Kissinger and their pals at ITT went beyond "making the Chilean economy scream" and enjoyed a full-blown military assault against Chile which began the bloody fascist coup there. Here is a very brief history of that September 1.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18357.htm
Bin Laden and 'Azzam the American':
Al-Qaeda with American characteristics By Sukant Chandan To find such radical pronouncements as those from Bin Laden when he calls on people who have 'previously liberated yourselves before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism', to liberate themselves from 'the deception, shackles and attrition of the capitalist system', a system he continues to argue that 'seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of "globalization" in order to protect democracy.'
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18362.htm
Bin Laden is Right? The Unwarranted Influence of America's Global "Defense" Corporation By Brian Bogart You know your country's "democratic" leadership and rationale for war are in trouble when the anointed most-evil enemy makes more sense than they do.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18364.htm
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18361.htm
9/11 As A License To Kill By Norman Solomon From the outset, the warfare state has exploited "9/11," a label at once too facile and too laden with historic weight -- giving further power to the tacit political axiom that perception is reality.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18354.htm === 9-11, Six Years Later By Paul Craig Roberts When faced with disturbing events, the Romans asked a question, "Cui bono?" Who benefits? This question was conspicuously absent from the official investigation.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18353.htm
Remembering The Atrocities Of 9/11 - 34 Years Ago By NY Transfer Some of us have been marking the atrocities of September 11 for 34 years. On September 11, 1973, Nixon, Kissinger and their pals at ITT went beyond "making the Chilean economy scream" and enjoyed a full-blown military assault against Chile which began the bloody fascist coup there. Here is a very brief history of that September 1.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18357.htm
Bin Laden and 'Azzam the American':
Al-Qaeda with American characteristics By Sukant Chandan To find such radical pronouncements as those from Bin Laden when he calls on people who have 'previously liberated yourselves before from the slavery of monks, kings, and feudalism', to liberate themselves from 'the deception, shackles and attrition of the capitalist system', a system he continues to argue that 'seeks to turn the entire world into a fiefdom of the major corporations under the label of "globalization" in order to protect democracy.'
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18362.htm
Bin Laden is Right? The Unwarranted Influence of America's Global "Defense" Corporation By Brian Bogart You know your country's "democratic" leadership and rationale for war are in trouble when the anointed most-evil enemy makes more sense than they do.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18364.htm