Rummy's replacement advocated illegal bombing of Nicaragua

In 1984, Robert Gates, Bush's current nominee to replace Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense, advocated bombing Nicaragua in a memo to his then boss, CIA director William Casey.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ga...

Whatever the military and political merits of that action or of overthrowing the Sandinista in general, if Gates' advice had been followed, the Reagan administration would have been breaking the law (further). This was hardly an obscure law either. It was all over the news at the time.


The 1982 Boland Amendment forbid giving any military assistance to the overthrow of the Nicaraguan government, financial or direct.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boland_Amendment

It should be noted that the Sandinistas came to power as part of a coalition that included the woman the administration approved of to take Ortega's place. The Sandinistas won an internationally monitored election before that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Nicaragua#Sandi...

when they lost the next one, they peacefully handed over power.

It is worth noting that the US backed replacement privatized industries the Sandinistas had nationalized. How many Nicaraguans do you suppose that benefited?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Nicaragua#Post-...

I don't have any particular love for the Sandinistas (or animosity either), but if we claim to support democracy we should do so even when the results of elections get some corporation's knickers in a knot. Also, given the last couple of years, if the Bush faction demonizes someone, I would at least pause and take a good hard look at them before kicking them too.

Gates is probably more in the mold of Papa Bush's men, quiet, competent, and bland. But the policies he will pursue will be no less destructive than those of the more brazen, blundering Baby Bush crowd.

I doubt that the Democrats will oppose him. There are bigger fish to fry. But they should at least get his feet in the frying pan and make him feel the hot grease.




robert gates irancontra boland amendment donald rumsfeld nicaragua George HW Bush ronald reagan president george w bush republican GOP conservative corruption occupation halliburton colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq democracy political opinion public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

SIROTA: 'Bipartisanship' shows real power divide--people vs. money

As soon as there is talk of bipartisanship, whether from Democrats or Republicans, it means they all got the same fax from the Chamber of Commerce. As Sirota points out here, the real divide in Washington is not ideological but people vs. money, as was shown by trade and business oriented bills that get broad support even though they screw the vast majority of Americans. He could have taken this even further and applied it to our foreign policy. Pundits, even many on the left, pretend that foreign policy is a struggle between ideologues and realpolitik types. It is not. It is about money. American oil companies want the profits from Iraq's oil, and we invade Iraq. The elected president of Venezuela wants to keep more of the income from his country's oil, thus cutting into oil company profits, and he is targeted for recall elections (sound familiar?), coups, and assassination. Any talk of spreading democracy at gunpoint is a lie. They want to steal, and they tell a nice story so we go along with it. This not only puts money ahead of Iraqi and other foreign people, it puts money ahead of us. To the degree that these wars affect terrorism they increase it. And a big reason why terrorism exists is because businesses have demanded our government put their profits ahead of the economic welfare and self-determination of people in the Middle East. In addition to paying the cost of seizing that asset for oil companies with our safety, we pay with our tax dollars and soldiers lives. And how do oil companies repay us? They demand more tax cuts, gouge us at the pumps, and pay their PR machine to quash alternatives to their product. I like capitalism. It gives me good tennis shoes and this nice computer. But just as we wouldn't let a nymphomaniac write our sex laws or a drug addict write our drug laws, we should let corporations write our foreign and domestic policy or they will stack the deck and privatize everything to squeeze every last dime out of us, and by doing the same to other countries, make us hated to boot. KEY EXCERPTS: “Bipartisanship” Hides the Real Power Equation That No One Talks About 11/23/2006 {SNIP} Anyone who spends 5 minutes around the halls of power in the nation’s capital knows that Washington is dominated by one party: The Money Party, and that the People Party is far outnumbered - even after this election. Look no further than votes on the bankruptcy bill, the energy bill, the class action bill, China PNTR and NAFTA to figure out which politicans who call themselves Republicans and Democrats actually belong to the Money Party and which politicians actually belong to the People Party. The Establishment pretends this paradigm doesn’t exist - they need the drama of Democrats vs. Republicans to sell newspapers, and more importantly, hiding the existence of the real power equation is in the interest of all the major for-profit corporations that own the media. {SNIP} What this election really was was a surge for the People Party, because so many candidates were elected on anti-Money Party themes (opposition to pay-to-play corruption, opposition to lobbyist-written trade pacts, etc.). This explains why in the election’s aftermath we hear such repetitive calls for “bipartisanship”: they are really repetitive and not-so-hidden attempts to make sure the Money Party that includes both Republicans and Democrats remains dominant and that the election’s mandate is ignored. The thing they really do not want is for the People Party to assert itself against the Money Party. I hope when Pelosi and other Democrats talk about “bipartisanship” they understand the real partisan divide in Washington, and will use their power to build coalitions of Republicans and Democrats to push the People Party’s agenda. Because doing the opposite - solidifying coalitions of Republicans and Democrats to continue pushing the Money Party’s agenda - is not the “bipartisanship” this country wants or deserves. To paraphrase Barry Goldwater, I would remind progressives that partisanship in the defense of regular people is no vice, and Washington’s faux bipartisanship in the pursuit of selling out is no virtue. FULL TEXT: http://davidsirota.com/index.php/2006/11/23/bipartisans...

david sirota bipartisan iraq war money party terrorism oil people party president george w bush nafta bankruptcy bill nancy pelosi dlc democratic leadership council republican GOP conservative corruption occupation halliburton colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq democratempire peak oil propaganda corporationfascism democracy political opinion imperialism venezuela war on terror hugo chavez public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

IMPEACHMENT POSTCARDS to send Pelosi and other Congresspersons

Both are 4 x 6.

I made a separate one for Pelosi because I thought I could put her address on the other side, but they don't let you customize that.

If you got the generic ones, you could send one to Pelosi, your congressperson, your senators, and give another set to someone else to do the same.

Get 'em here:

http://www.cafepress.com/fascart/2097421

The back of both is a generic postcard format with layout for stamp, address, return address, and room for additional comments.

To Pelosi:



Send to:

Nancy Pelosi
2371 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

District Office:

450 Golden Gate Ave.
14th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102

It would be nice if she had a half million or more of these waiting for her the first day she's Speaker of the House.



No name specified:



Find your congressperson or senators & their addresses:

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/11/find-your-senator-or-representative.html

If you want to use or modify the content in a letter of your own, you can find the text to copy here:

http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/11/send-5000...





impeach impeachment postcard president george w bush dick cheney
iraq war wmd terrorism oil congress osama bin laden representative habeas corpushurricane katrina 9/11 september 11 9/11 commission venezuela haiti corruption occupation halliburton coup nancy pelosi john conyers professor smartass iraq petitionletter propaganda corporation fascism democracy political opinion war on terror muslim public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gay political action karl rove puppet abu ghraib torture torture memo nazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

Send 500,000 impeachment letters to Pelosi by her first day as speaker Jan. 3

Fair.org has already documented a move in the mainstream press to squelch any talk of impeaching Bush, and a similar astroturfing campaign is going on online to create a consensus against impeachment.

While arguing with one of those who think it's a bad idea, someone said there had to be a "groundswell of support" like there was for the impeachment of Nixon and cited this article:

More than 50,000 telegrams poured in on Capitol Hill today, so many, Western Union was swamped. Most of them demanded impeaching Mr. Nixon.

John Chancellor, NBC News on a Special Report on October 20, 1973

We already have more support than that. When John Conyers took Bush his petition demanding he answer questions about the DSM, it had 540,000 singnatures, over ten times as many as wrote about Nixon. I would bet most of those people would write to demand impeachment of Bush, probably more.

The great thing is, now we have someone to focus this demand on who can and possibly will act (in spite of her protests to the contrary): Nancy Pelosi.

She should have a half million signatures waiting for her her first day as Speaker of the House.

I think she and the many of the Democrats want to do this, but to overcome the reluctance of the DC etablishment and big money interests who are afraid their ox will be gored along with Bush & Cheney, she needs constant overwhelming evidence of public DEMAND not just support for impeachment.

Fax or snail mail the letter below or your own variation to:

FAX: 202-225-8259

Nancy Pelosi
2371 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515

District Office:

450 Golden Gate Ave.
14th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94102

emails are nice, but letters and faxes make a physical pile that form a powerful visual, and that should be Pelosi opening her door and being buried by letters.

CC a copy to your congressman too. You can find their address here: http://www.house.gov /

Post this around to other boards and send it to you friends, and let's see if we can get something going.

Speaker Pelosi,

The American people elected a Democratic majority to restore checks and balances, the rule of law, and our reputation as a law-abiding country in the world community. These cannot be accomplished unless President George W. Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney are impeached. Their impeachable offenses dwarf those that led to proceedings against President Clinton and President Andrew Jonson, and the threatened proceeding against President Richard Nixon combined. The offenses below are already supported with evidence in the public record, including admissions of guilt. It is likely that investigations prior to impeachment would turn up even more.

IMPEACH BUSH & CHENEY FOR:

• Lying to the American people, Congress, and the world about the threat from Iraq & need for war.
  
  
• War of aggression against Iraq, which posed no threat to US.
  
  
• Death of over 600,000 Iraqis and nearly 3,000 S troops in unnecessary war.
  
  
• Exploiting 9/11 for political gain and for war to benefit oil companies and other cronies.
  
  
• Canceling Iraq’s oil contracts with foreign companies and giving them to American corporations and restructuring Iraq’s oil industry to their specification in violation of the Hague and Geneva Conventions.
  
  
• Awarding no-bid contracts to cronies for rebuilding and oil exploitation in Iraq.
  
  
• Inciting animosity toward the US by attacking Iraq and falsely claiming it was part of “War on Terror.”
  
  
• Authorizing the use of torture in violation of the Geneva Convention and US law and against the advice of the uniformed military.
  
  
• Participating in the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Haiti and attempting to do so in Venezuela.
  
  
• Failure to fully cooperate with 9/11 Commission and joint congressional inquiry, and refusal to comply with Freedom of Information Act in other areas as well.
  
  
• Warrantless wiretapping of American citizens.
  
  
• Issuing signing statements that contradict the plain meaning of legislation, including on issues of torture.
  
  
• Denying Americans and others habeas corpus rights even after Supreme Court ruled against it.
  
  
• Coercing government employees to lie to Congress and the American people about the cost of Medicare drug benefit, global warning, and toxic hazard of NYC after 9/11.
  
  
• Failure to provide timely aid to Hurricane Katrina victims and appointing someone with no experience to run FEMA.
  
  
• Barring Americans who disagree with the president from public events paid for with taxpayer money, and forcibly removing some with private security posing as Secret Service agents.

Listen to the American people so we can be confident we have a democracy again.

Sincerely,

Most of my list is paraphrased from the one found at ImpeachBush.


impeach impeachment president george w bush dick cheney
iraq war wmd terrorism oil cindy sheehan osama bin laden real reasons habeas corpushurricane katrina 9/11 september 11 9/11 commission venezuela haiti corruption occupation halliburton coup nancy pelosi john conyers professor smartass iraq petitionletter propaganda corporation fascism democracy political opinion war on terror muslim public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gay political action karl rove puppet abu ghraib torture torture memo nazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

Find your senator or representative

Phone fax, snail mail, and email these guys and let them know what you want. They work for us, not the other way around.


US Senate

senate.gov



US House of Representatives

house.gov

LETTER TO DEM: Iraq War & business first foreign policy

I got a nice campaign letter from Barbara Ann Radnofsky entitled "No More Iraqs," which was good as far as it went, but failed to get to the heart of the problem. My letter isn't meant as a criticism of her, but as a call for a real re-assessment of the core of our foreign policy that few Democrats seem willing to do (Byron Dorgan and a few others excepted).

Dear Ms. Radnofsky,

Thank you for the email on parallels to Vietnam, but in the case of Iraq, there is an even bigger issue than response to strategic threats, particularly since the Bush administration knowingly exaggerated the threat Iraq would pose to us even if they did have nukes. The issue is how much corporate and financial interests dictate our foreign policy, often to the detriment of the safety of the American people since it incites such resentment in the countries these policies target.

In the case of Iraq, the business interest was oil. Bush cancelled Iraq's oil contracts with Russia, France, and others and gave them to American corporations. Gen. Jay Garner the first guy we sent over to run Iraq said seizing the oil and the radical privatization of their economy would incite an insurgency. He was right, and immediately fired.

Saddam was a bad guy, but this business first approach also trumps democracy when democracy doesn't produce the results business likes. Bush vetoed the Iraqi parliament's first choice for prime minister, and backed a recall and even coup against Hugo Chavez, who has been elected and re-elected by wide majorities with international election monitors watching (in stark contrast to our own presidential elections). Chavez' primary sin seems to be driving a hard bargain with the oil companies and having the audacity to ask for the same royalties on his oil that the US gets on our oil--about 13-16%, and is actually using some of the money to improve the lives of his citizens. Far from suppressing freedom, I heard him take a question from a reporter whose paper's owner backed the coup against him. In the US, a reporter like Helen Thomas who merely says something critical about the president is ignored for years and in the case of Dan Rather, literally run out of his job.

Chavez is likewise popular in the rest of South America because our pro-corporate, pro-banking foreign policy, neoliberalism, has had such brutal effects there.

I like capitalism. I think I have better tennis shoes and computers because of it. But our foreign policy is not merely promoting capitalism, but giving a structural advantage to a few at the expense of the rest of the world and the average American.

If we stopped invading countries that elected leaders who stand up for their people, and stopped writing trade agreements that make the poor poorer, and create a race to the bottom for the lowest wages which is sucking American jobs out of the country, wages here would stabilize because they would be doing the same elsewhere. If we allowed people to choose their own government (without our troops guns in their faces or expectation of a military coup if they make the "wrong" choice) and run their own economies, they will be less likely to become terrorists who want to fly planes into our buildings.

The past few years it has become painfully clear that even our own democracy takes a back seat when oil companies see a prize like Iraq's trillions of dollars worth of oil. If the true goal of ensuring the profits from that oil went to American corporations were presented honestly to the American people, stripped of any talk of WMD, terrorist boogey men, spreading democracy, or even the less embarrassing lie that we need to invade to get access to the oil (which can be done far more cheaply through negotiating contracts as China and other countries are doing) few Americans would support the war apart from major shareholders in oil companies.

If the Democrats take over Congress, it would be nice if they changed things so the worst criticisms of our foreign policy are no longer true.

Links to sources on Iraq's oil & neoliberalism:
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/09/iraq-oil-war-resources.html








iraq war wmd terrorism oil oil companies president george w bush osama bin laden real reasons cartoonhugo chavez byron dorgan radnofsky republican GOP conservative corruption occupation halliburton neoliberalism colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq democratlies peak oil propaganda corporationfascism democracy political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal smartass comments resistance censored news psa shell oil companies shell bpExxonMobil ChevronTexaco ConocoPhillips International Monetary Fund imf colonialism hydrocarbon law

PHOTOSHOP: Arnold Schwarzenegger's resume

While the guy running against Arnold here in CA is doing the best he can, some of the big dogs in the Democratic Party (with the exception of Kerry, Boxer, Dean, and a few others) seem content to let the terminator run loose until '08.

When he 'won' last time, a quarter of the instructors at one of the community colleges where I teach were fired, and tuition doubled.

I'd say Arnold is nearly as big a threat America and the Democratic Party as the GOP Congress. But I guess they'll figure that out the same way they did when they forgave and forgot Iran Contra, the October Surprise, election 2000 & 2004, and...

click to see full sized

Sources:

www.arnoldexposed.com

arnoldwatch.org

www.rotten.com/library/bio/entertainers/actors/arnold-sch...


Arnold Schwarzenegger governor terminator conan the barbarian steroids pot marijuana sexual harassment gang bang gay porn george w bush nazi enron ken lay corruption corporation re-elect cartooneditorial cartoon worst president ever girlie man girly man CA governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
CA governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
california governorArnold Schwarzenegger

VIDEO: Great 'stamp act' ad against Allen, sad story on use...

This is exactly the kind of ad I've been waiting for the Democrats to run and it is on a substantive issue.

Click on pic to see flick





The tragedy is the story the guy who made this told, which I hope is not true:

I made this ad as a free gift to the Webb campaign. I felt this would strike a chord across party lines. The Webb campaign and the DSCC "LOVE IT," but tell me that they cannot run it because they did originate the concept, and their "rules" prevent its use. Webb is at least 4 points behind Allen. I believe that if they ran this ad, Webb would take Virginia. If anyone knows someone with the guts to run this thing on the air, about half a million dollars is all it would take!

Why in god's name would you NOT run a memorable, issue based, effective ad?

I can't believe that it is just that the Democrats are married to some brain dead campaign consultants who couldn't sell water to someone whose ass was on fire.

If Webb is running a better ad, post it, so I'll have a reason to hope the Dems aren't shooting themselves in the foot with blandness again.


george allen jim webb commercial campaign senate republican democrat consultant youtube

Help remove Arnold Schwarzenegger--take 30 sec to google bomb

Arnold Schwarzenegger will no longer be a California problem if he is re-elected--he will like be promoted to the Senate and they will try to run him for president (in spite of the Constitution).

He is as much a tool of the same handful of corporate interests as Bush & Cheney, but is a test product for areas where the religous right shtick doesn't sell. The result is the same though. Essential services like education cut, teachers, nurses, and firefighters get the beat down, corporations get a free ride, and the rich get a tax cut.

This bit of code will take someone to a page of Arnold with his hand on a woman's ass, smoking pot, and off to the side, links to his dealings with Enron, and other embarassments.

This is not just a political itch for me--it could be the difference between losing my job or not. When Arnold 'won' the recall, he cut education so draconianly that one of the community colleges I worked at fired a third of their part time faculty (and we make up three fourths of the faculty at most schools), and then tried to raid the public employees pensions.

If you have a blogspot blog, this is easy: just post this in your blog's template, then after you save, hit the 'republish entire blog' button so it puts the tag on all your archived pages.


CA governor <a href="http://www.arnoldexposed.com/arnold.htm#women ">Arnold Schwarzenegger</a><Br>

CA governor <a href="http://www.arnoldexposed.com/arnold.htm#women " rel="tag">Arnold Schwarzenegger</a><Br>

california governor<a href="http://technorati.com/tag/Arnold+Schwarzenegger " rel="tag">Arnold Schwarzenegger</a>


For instructions on pasting in other blog software, go here:

http://blogswarm.mydd.com/story/2006/10/25/145726/40

At the very least, you can paste it into a post on your blog or comments on discussion boards. Given the personal attacks the right has used in the past not just on Democrats but even Republicans who weren't slavish enough, like John McCain, you know this is the kind of article they will pay attention to, but there are also links to more substantive issues.

Arnold Schwarzenegger governor terminator steroids sexual harassment nazi enron ken lay corruption corporation re-elect

VIDEO: Bush & co. "Stay the course" then "NEVER said stay the course"

click to see video:

One of the most effective hits on Kerry during the 2004 campaign was "flip flopper," that helped by saying he "voted for the bill before he voted against it" instead of "the later version had changes that I couldn't support" or something like that. But at least he didn't say he never supported it.

This is remarkably similar to what the Bushies did with weapons inspectors in Iraq before the war. One of Bush's demands was that Saddam let weapons inspectors back into Iraq. Apparently, he didn't expect Saddam would actually agree, which he did, and the inspectors found nothing. The Bushies improvised by saying it was because Saddam was hiding the weapons from them therefore we must attack anyway. But once the weapons inspectors pulled out before our attack, Bush went back to saying the war was because he wouldn't let weapons inspectors in as if they had never been there.

And most people swallowed it.

The protagonist's job in the commie dictatorship in 1984 was cutting people who fell from government favor out of news stories and photos, but in real life, that is unnecessary. Most people never think to check the archives and those who get their news from Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, and Fox News probably believed Bush never said "stay the course" as soon as he said he never said it. And if he says he never said he never said it, they will believe that too and dutifully forget the previous revision.



stay the course president george w bush iraq war video youtube 1984 orwell insurgents vietnam oil flip flop republican GOP conservative corruption occupation halliburton political humor colonialism white mans burden professor smartass rush limbaugh fox newslies bill o'reilly propaganda corporation fascism democracy war on terror public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gay karl rove puppet fascist chimp wmv movie humor comedy funny nazi smartass comments resistance censored news mike dixon

Michael J. Fox stem cell commercial for Senate candidate

For the past couple of decades when it comes to advertising, the GOP has been like Coca-Cola and the Democrats have been like a local mortgage company offering a new way to amortize your mortgage.

Until now.

The first ad that made it's point in a simple, direct and memorable way was this ad on the obsolete body armor given to our troops:

still screenshots

VIDEO

Vote up youtube video of this ad

Now Michael J. Fox nails it in this ad on stem cell research for US Senate candidate from Missouri, Claire McCaskill.

On many issues, Democrats have the right ideas, but talk like accountants and bureaucrats instead of like and to real people. They also seem to be so afraid of offending the religious right and corporations that they forget a lot of people would vote FOR them if they were actively AGAINST those core GOP supporters who are screwing the rest of us while our elected representatives sit on their hands.

michael j fox parkinsons Claire McCaskill jim talent senate senator race campaign president george w bush 2006 election missouri democratic party republican GOP conservative corruption political humor advertising campaign commercial professor smartass public relations worst president ever failure video fascist youtube.com wmv movie
iraq war votevets.org body armor smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

LETTER: Re. Max Boot's training Iraqi troops excuse

To: Los Angeles Times

Max Boot's Oct. 18 column "Bring Iraqi Forces Up to Speed," implies Iraqis are apes who just descended from the trees, and can't figure out how to put a military and police force together. Somehow, the insurgents aren't having a problem attacking our troops, and a decade before we invaded, Iraq fought a Iran, a much larger country to a draw. The problem is not training, but motivation.

The current problem is getting troops and cops to fire on their own people who they know may have a legitimate beef with us being there. Which sounds a hell of a lot like Vietnam. Wasn't that the big plan there? Train the Vietnamese to fight for us in our absence? Altough it was never put that bluntly, that's the real problem.

When the perception and reality are we are there to screw them out of their oil wealth and kill those who protest too much with either airstrikes or death squads, it's going to be tough to find people to consistently fight for us. Those who do are unlikely to be choir boys, and will likely inspire even less love for the puppet government.

Maybe if pissants like Max Boot spent less time making up fake macho names for themselves or more time reading history, talking to Iraqis, or God forbid, actually serving in the military themselves, they wouldn't say things that get thousands of our troops and over half a million Iraqis killed.









max boot train iraqi troops train iraq war los angeles times la times terrorism oil president george w bush real reasons theftvietnam iran chickenhawk republican GOP conservative corruption occupation halliburton insurgents colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq democrat lies peak oil propaganda corporationfascism democracy political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gay karl rove puppet fascist chimp nazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

ALTERNET: Bush's Petro-Cronies almost lock in control of Iraq's OIL

This is the most aggravatingly ignored story of the Iraq War,and the real reason why we are there. Bush hase given his oil cronies a gift worth up to $20 TRillion right now, that will probably be worth a lot more by the time the last barrel is pumped, and doesn't include large undiscovered reserves that they think are out there.

Beneath the obvious lies about WMD, terrorism, and spreading democracy, a second layer of argument for the war is that strategically, we needed control of that oil for our economy.

We didn't.

We could have simply bought it the way China and others are doing. If Saddam or anyone else stopped selling to us, they'd be shooting themselves in the foot since we use 25% of the world's supply. That would be like a drug dealer cutting off Robert Downey Jr.

Second, if we needed control of that amount of energy, the half trillion we have already spent in Iraq could have built enough solar panels and wind turbines to power new cars with electricity, and could have provided subsidies for ethanol and biodiesel until those electrics are on the road.

No, this war was simply about which companies profited from pumping the oil, and whether it bought a yacht in Shaghai or Houston.

The Iraqis and the rest of the world know this story. Most Americans and even progressives seem to be oblivious to it, but if this is why we are there, it stands to reason that we won't be able to pull out of Iraq until we figure out how to separate those oil companies from Iraq's oil teat, or at least a way to make their deals something the average Iraqis doesn't think is a scam.

Ironically, while people in Iraq and Venezuela vote and march in the streets on this issue, most Americans don't know how much we get for oil taken on public lands or even that we get or should get anything for that.

KEY EXCERPTS:

Bush's Petro-Cartel Almost Has Iraq's Oil

By Joshua Holland, AlterNet. Posted October 16, 2006.


During the 12-year sanction period, the Big Four were forced to sit on the sidelines while the government of Saddam Hussein cut deals with the Chinese, French, Russians and others (despite the sanctions, the United States ultimately received 37 percent of Iraq's oil during that period, according to the independent committee that investigated the oil-for-food program, but almost all of it arrived through foreign firms). In a 1999 speech, Dick Cheney, then CEO of the oil services company Halliburton, told a London audience that the Middle East was where the West would find the additional 50 million barrels of oil per day that he predicted it would need by 2010, but, he lamented, "while even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow."

Chafing at the idea that the Chinese and Russians might end up with what is arguably the world's greatest energy prize, industry leaders lobbied hard for regime change throughout the 1990s. With the election of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in 2000 -- the first time in U.S. history that two veterans of the oil industry had ever occupied the nation's top two jobs -- they would finally get the "greater access" to the region's oil wealth, which they had long lusted after.

If the U.S. invasion of Iraq had occurred during the colonial era a hundred years earlier, the oil giants, backed by U.S. forces, would have simply seized Iraq's oil fields. Much has changed since then in terms of international custom and law (when then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz did in fact suggest seizing Iraq's Southern oil fields in 2002, Colin Powell dismissed the idea as "lunacy").



But the execs from Big Oil didn't just want access to Iraq's oil; they wanted access on terms that would be inconceivable unless negotiated at the barrel of a gun. Specifically, they wanted an Iraqi government that would enter into production service agreements (PSAs) for the extraction of Iraq's oil.

PSAs, developed in the 1960s, are a tool of today's kinder, gentler neocolonialism; they allow countries to retain technical ownership over energy reserves but, in actuality, lock in multinationals' control and extremely high profit margins -- up to 13 times oil companies' minimum target, according to an analysis by the British-based oil watchdog Platform.

FULL TEXT:
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/43045

PART II
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/43077

IRAQ OIL LINKS:
(covers nearly all sources mentioned in article)
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/09/iraq-oil-...







iraq war oil psa production sharing agreement president george w bush oil companies shell bpExxonMobil ChevronTexaco ConocoPhillips republican GOP conservative corruption occupation International Monetary Fund imf colonialism hydrocarbon law wolfowitz colin powell professor smartass iraq peak oil propaganda greg palast corporation fascism democracy political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods worst president ever failure war criminal puppet fascist chimp nazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

Why did Bush invade Iraq? $6-20 TRILLION minimum for oil companies

Take the current price of oil, about $60 per barrel, and assume that won't change much (the general trend will be up though) and multiply that by the range of estimates of unpumped oil in Iraq. The Brookings Institute says the DOE lowballs it at 112 billion barrels but some estimates are as high as 300 bbl.

112 billion x $60 = $6.7 trillion

300 billion x $60 = $18 trillion

If you fool around with different pricing scenarios, it's not hard to imagine those numbers being a lot higher, particularly as other oil reserves run dry, the prices run up, and the Persian Gulf is the last place with easily recoverable oil.

Bush forced the Iraqis to denationalize their oil, cancelled Saddam's contracts with other countries, and gave them to American companies.

Everything else Bush has done has been about cronyism or suckering the religious right enough to vote for him so that he can practice cronyism.

Why is it so hard for the press, the Democrats, and even most in the "progressive" press to say out loud that Bush went there to steal oil and give it to his friends?

BEST LINKS ON IRAQ OIL STORY:
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2006/09/iraq-oil-war-resources.html


iraq war oil oil reserves president george w bush oil companies shell bp ExxonMobil ChevronTexaco ConocoPhillips british petroleum production sharing agreement oil concession bp corruption occupation halliburton cronyism colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq democrat lies peak oil petroleum corporationprice per barrel opec worst president ever failure war criminal karl rove puppet fascist chimp smartass comments resistance censored news

Update on the censored struggle for Iraq's OIL

I've got to do more research on this, but my opinion of Joe Biden has just gone up. Apparently, he tried to pass legislation that said the US should not exert "control over any oil resource of Iraq."

The GOP gutted the original bill and Biden tried to add it as an amendment to something else.

Given the virtual news blackout of the oil machinations in Iraq and in particular how American oil companies are profiting from it, Biden's action looks like a thankless (and in fact dangerous) act of principle rather than the glory dog opportunism and corporate toadying he often appears to be doing.

It never ceases to amaze me that we invaded the country with the world's second largest oil reserves, and not only do neither the administration and the mainstream media rarely discuss it, but neither does most of the progressive media, instead rehashing how the reasons given for going in were lies (WMD, terrorism) or buying into the reasons the administration gives for staying (democracy, stability, security) but claiming they aren't succeeding at those equally imaginary or at least secondary objectives.

A lot of people say it is enough to note that we wouldn't be in Iraq if it's main export was coconuts, but we publish and critique every bullshit pronouncement about the number two al qaeda man in Iraq, or new defense of the war that is simply a reworking of the same speech given since 2002.

The case for the war for oil is pretty well established and documented though not widely published.
(see oil links after article)


For those who see through the more embarrassing excuses for the war, there's a second level of lies that seems to assuage the consciences of people in the Pentagon and State Department: we need that oil for our economy. Colin Powell's lieutenant Larry Wilkerson said as much plainly.

But this argument is also a lie. If it was just about access to oil, we could get it the way China from Iran, Canada, and Venezuela: buy it on long-term contracts.

Instead, this is about who profits from pump Iraq's oil--Iraqis and foreign oil companies, or American oil companies (tipping the Iraqis whatever their generosity moves them to).

KEY EXCERPTS:

Oil Pressure

When it comes to oil, the U.S. administration is bypassing democracy in Iraq


Greg Muttitt | August 28, 2006

The U.S. campaign on the fledgling Iraqi government has been successful. Following his appointment in May, new Oil Minister Husayn al-Shahristani announced that one of his top priorities would be the writing of an oil law to allow Iraq to sign contracts with "the largest companies."

This would be the first time in more than thirty years that foreign companies would receive a major stake in Iraq's oil. Oil was brought into public ownership and control back in 1975.



Mr. Bodman did not stop at reviewing the draft law himself in Baghdad: he also arranged for Dr. Al-Shahristani to meet with nine major oil companies - including Shell, BP, ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips - for them to comment on the draft as well, during the Minister's trip to Washington DC the following week.

Given the pressures involved, perhaps the Minister felt he did not have much choice. His promise to pass the law through parliament by the end of 2006 was set in Iraq's agreement with the International Monetary Fund last December. According to that agreement, IMF officials would also review and comment on a draft in September. And still, the draft law has not been seen by the Iraqi parliament. Meanwhile, an official from the Oil Ministry has stated that Iraqi civil society and the general public will not be consulted at all.

The issues could hardly be more important for Iraq. Oil accounts for more than 90% of government revenue, and is the main driver of Iraq's economy. And decisions made in the coming months will not be reversible - once contracts are signed, they will have a major bearing on Iraq's economy and politics for decades to come. No wonder a recent poll showed that when asked what Iraqis thought were the three main reasons why the United States invaded Iraq, 76% gave "to control Iraqi oil" as their first choice.

Attempting to reverse this perception and change U.S. policy, lawmakers in the House and Senate have passed legislation stating that the United States should not exert "control over any oil resource of Iraq." But usurping democracy here at home, Republicans stripped this language out of the bill's final version Hoping for better luck the second time around, Senator Joe Biden successfully led the charge to add this language to another bill currently awaiting final passage.

FULL TEXT:

http://fpif.org/fpiftxt/3466

Biden Iraq Oil Amendment:

S.AMDT.3717
Amends: H.R.4939

AMENDMENT PURPOSE:
To provide that none of the funds made available by title I of this Act may be made available to establish permanent military bases in Iraq or to exercise control over the oil infrastructure or oil resources of Iraq.

Author of this article's detailed report on restructuring of Iraq's oil industry to benefit our oil companies:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2...

Greg Palast's timeline of Iraq oil meetings (with video interviews with the players):
http://www.gregpalast.com/iraqmeetingstime...

Colin Powell's chief of staff on oil motive for Iraq War:
http://professorsmartass.blogspot.com/2005...

Broader background on oil, war, and foreign policy:
http://www.mymethow.com/~joereid/oil_coup....

Naomi Klein on privatization and its effects in Iraq:
http://www.harpers.org/BaghdadYearZero.htm...

Economic war crimes in Geneva and Hague Conventions:

The Hague Convention of 1907 (IV) see articles 47, 53, 55
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/195?OpenD...

The Geneva Convention of 1949 (IV) we've broken almost every section of article 147, and Bush has personally broken article 148.
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/380?OpenD...

The Bush Agenda: Invading the World, One Economy at a Time author's website:
http://www.bushagenda.net/index.php

A good brief summary of neoliberalism:
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=37...

How "economic hit men" set it up and enforce it:
http://www.johnperkins.org/Preface.htm




iraq war oil production sharing agreement president george w bush oil companies shell bpExxonMobil ChevronTexaco ConocoPhillips republican GOP conservative corruption occupation International Monetary Fund imf colonialism hydrocarbon law professor smartass iraq peak oil propaganda corporation fascism democracy political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods worst president ever failure war criminal puppet fascist chimp nazi smartass comments resistance censored news rebel

Gore Vidal quote that parallels Goering on starting wars

Gore Vidal:

"Joseph Schumpeter ... in 1919, described ancient Rome in a way that sounds eerily like the United States in 2001: "There was no corner of the known world where some interest was not alleged to be in danger or under actual attack. If the interests were not Roman, they were those of Rome's allies; and if Rome had no allies, the allies would be invented . . . The fight was always invested with an aura of legality. Rome was always being attacked by evil-minded neighbours."' We have only outdone the Romans in turning metaphors such as the war on terrorism, or poverty, or Aids into actual wars on targets we appear, often, to pick at random in order to maintain turbulence in foreign lands."


http://www.tamilnation.org/intframe/iraq/v...

Hermann Goering:

"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm

When Hitler talked to his inner circle about his plans for war, his words could have come from the mouth of any world leader--but probably not publicly:

We were living in an age of economic empires in which the primitive urge to colonization was again manifesting itself; in the cases of Japan and Italy economic motives underlay the urge for expansion, and with Germany, too, economic need would supply the stimulus.

Adolf Hitler, Hossbach Memorandum
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/time...

Dick Cheney had a similar thought:

Oil is unique in that it is so strategic in nature. We are not talking about soapflakes or leisurewear here. Energy is truly fundamental to the world’s economy. The Gulf War was a reflection of that reality.



Governments and the national oil companies are obviously controlling about ninety per cent of the assets. Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world’s oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow...


Dick Cheney, 1999 speech to at the Institute of Petroleum

http://www.energybulletin.net/559.html

Luckily for the oil industry, Cheney figured out a time-tested shortcut around that "slow" progress.



quote quotation gore vidal hermann goering iraq war dick cheney terrorism oil vice president president george w bush adolf hitler Hossbach Memorandum oilpeak oil petroleum nazi republican GOP conservative corruption occupation halliburton roman empire colonialism white mans burden professor smartass iraq democrat< propaganda corporation fascism democracy political opinion agent provocateur george w bush war on terror muslim public opinion opinion public relations foreign policy al qaeda false flag cointelpro northwoods terrorist worst president ever failure war criminal idiot retard closet gay karl rove puppet fascist chimp smartass comments resistance censored news rebel