Iraq Archives

What London Reads

December 19, 2006 03:04 AM

I'm often told that in order to get the "real news" about America - and particularly the Bush administration - you have to go to sources like the Guardian of London, which can bravely report the truths that American news bureaus dare not utter, presumably from fear that some third-tier policy dork at the Labor Department will no longer speak to them. So here goes.

Bush accused of gagging critic of Iran policy

Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington
Monday December 18, 2006
The Guardian

The White House yesterday faced fresh accusations of tailoring intelligence to suit its political viewpoint from a former CIA analyst barred from publishing a critical newspaper commentary on American policy towards Iran.

Flynt Leverett, a former Middle East analyst at the CIA and the National Security Council who has criticised the Bush administration for going to war with Iraq and for its handling of Iran, accuses the White House of pressing the CIA to demand sweeping cuts to an opinion piece he wrote for the New York Times on Washington's policy towards Tehran....

Mr Leverett said he was ordered to drop references to Iran's cooperation with the US on Afghanistan in the aftermath of the September 11 2001 attacks. He claims the White House has had no objections to similar assertions by less critical analysts.

Uh huh. The administration - no, I'm sorry, "Bush" - has not objected to other people saying the same thing Flynt Leverett wants to say, maybe because these other people are "less critical" of its/his policies.

So basically, Flynt Leverett believes that there's a gag order on Flynt Leverett (if that is his real name). News to me!

More news to me: The administration - or "Bush" - spends time trying to prevent negative portrayals of its/his policies from appearing on the New York Times op-ed page. I'll say it: Mr. President, this war is lost and forces must be redeployed immediately - to PBS!

GWEN IFILL: Is that at the root of the lot of this, just basic, old-fashioned lack of trust?

FLYNT LEVERETT: I think that's an inaccurate reading of the record. I think that Iranian cooperation with the United States on Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks was critical to the success of our efforts to get rid of the Taliban and stand up the Karzai government in its stead.

From an Iranian perspective, their reward for that was to be labeled part of the "axis of evil" in President Bush's January 2002 State of the Union address.

There is considerable distrust and historical baggage on both sides; that's part of what makes this a difficult issue to move forward. But to say that that baggage and that mistrust is a reason for not trying, when it is manifestly in U.S. interest to try, I think is a real strategic misjudgment.

Clear and hold, Mr. President. Clear and hold.

Link · American Politics | Iran | Iraq | Journalism | News Media | War on Terror

Iraq Archives

Conyers: Paradise Postponed

May 18, 2006 07:50 AM

Being in the House minority has been good for John Conyers. Bewildered but powerless, he is free to howl impotently into the cosmic void about all and sundry Bush administration malfeasances, without any danger of being taken seriously. It's been a good bargain for Democrats, too. Conyers provides them with valuable outreach to the nuttier segments of the party base, while colleagues are never forced to acknowledge that he's a nitwit.

Trouble is, Conyers and the Democrats may not remain in the minority much longer, if the polls are to be believed. And while the specter of Conyers as Judiciary chairman may not be enough to rouse the GOP's disenchanted base, the specter of Conyers beginning impeachment proceedings following a Democratic takeover probably would. Although I personally would get a real kick out of these Conyers-chaired hearings, the Democratic leadership in the House is probably wise to suspect that the Republican base would feel otherwise. So, undoubtedly with some prodding from the higher-ups, Conyers today placed an op-ed in the Post disavowing any plan to "immediately" start the impeachment process. Where would anyone have gotten the idea that he might? Perhaps from the mock impeachment proceedings that Conyers has hosted in the Capitol basement, featuring the usual assortment of muttering cultists and conspirators.

Now, though, Conyers says he can't start "immediately," because lawmakers won't know enough about the seriousness of their own charges until the Bush administration starts answering questions.

Fair enough -- Congressional Republicans have been shamefully indulgent on matters of oversight. Bringing a few checks and balances back to Capitol Hill is not a bad reason to back the Democrats this November. (Though if Nancy Pelosi continues to mistake the Supreme Court for God, one imagines oversight in the House may continue to lag.) So fine, then. What does Conyers have in mind?

For example, to know whether intelligence was mistaken or manipulated in the run-up to the Iraq war, we need to know what information was made available to -- and actually read by -- decision makers and how views contradicting the case for war were treated.

We need to know the extent to which high-ranking officials approved of the use of torture and other cruel and inhumane treatment inflicted upon detainees. We need to know whether the leaking of the name of a covert CIA operative was deliberate or accidental, as well as the identity of those responsible.

Now, I know what you're thinking: Isn't most of this stuff dealt with in the reports from the Robb-Silberman commission and the Senate Intelligence Committee investigation into pre-war intelligence on Saddam's WMD programs? Yes. But who really takes that kind of stuff seriously? Or has the time to read it? Or -- you know -- whatever.

It was House Republicans who took power in 1995 with immediate plans to undermine President Bill Clinton by any means necessary, and they did so in the most autocratic, partisan and destructive ways imaginable. If there is any lesson from those "revolutionaries," it is that partisan vendettas ultimately provoke a public backlash and are never viewed as legitimate.

So, rather than seeking impeachment, I have chosen to propose comprehensive oversight of these alleged abuses. The oversight I have suggested would be performed by a select committee made up equally of Democrats and Republicans and chosen by the House speaker and the minority leader.

Wait -- did he say comprehensive oversight? My God, this man is drunk with power and malice!

The committee's job would be to obtain answers -- finally. At the end of the process, if -- and only if -- the select committee, acting on a bipartisan basis, finds evidence of potentially impeachable offenses, it would forward that information to the Judiciary Committee. This threshold of bipartisanship is appropriate, I believe, when dealing with an issue of this magnitude.

Yeah, I see his point. Why have independent commissions deal with this kind of stuff when you could have the full complement of preening lawmakers exchanging inanities and making Congress look ridiculous?

One-party rule has dug our nation into a deep hole over the past six years. The Judiciary Committee needs to fully implement the recommendations of the Sept. 11 commission, strengthen laws against wartime fraud, ban trade with state sponsors of terrorism, increase funding for community policing and protect government whistle-blowers. Most important, before we have another presidential election, I believe we need to pass laws protecting the integrity of our electoral system -- the very foundation of our democracy.

Oh well, I guess we won't get to read the rest of the op-ed, as Conyers seems to have trailed off into some other business about community policing and the Electoral System (peace be upon it).

But, based on what I read, I think he's probably allayed some of his leadership's concerns. Now if only they can fit "Vote Democrat for a full, bipartisan inquiry and potential impeachment referral over the Iraq War and Valerie Plame who was a covert CIA operative you better believe it" on a bumper sticker....

Link · American Politics | Congress | Iraq · TrackBack (15)

Iraq Archives

They love not to know

April 17, 2006 03:59 AM

The NYT officially enters the farce era of its narrative arc with yesterday's editorial endorsement of, well, ignorance.

Mr. Bush did not declassify the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq — in any accepted sense of that word — when he authorized I. Lewis Libby Jr., through Vice President Dick Cheney, to talk about it with reporters. He permitted a leak of cherry-picked portions of the report. The declassification came later....

Obviously, we do not object to government officials talking to reporters about important matters that their bosses do not want discussed. It would be impossible to cover any administration, especially one so secretive as this, unless that happened. (Judith Miller, who then worked for The Times, was one of the reporters Mr. Libby chose for this leak, although she never wrote about it.) But the version of the facts that Mr. Libby was authorized to divulge was so distorted that it seems more like disinformation than any sincere attempt to inform the public. [Emphases mine]

Oh dear. So the Times would prefer no information at all to "cherry-picked" information that is not declassified in an "accepted sense of that word." Even when the information would otherwise be kept secret, or could shed new light on a president's decision to go to war. The Times will just curse the darkness, thank you very much.

Let's put aside the question of accuracy. (The information, cherry-picked or otherwise, was in fact an accurate reflection of the intelligence community's consensus on Iraq at the time. The NIE just happens to have been wrong.) Does the Times really believe there are disinterested sources in the political world who, out of the goodness of their hearts (presumably), set aside time to leak complete, unbiased and otherwise secret information to reporters? Perhaps the editorialists consult an oracle. Or manatees! (link to video)

The unhappy reality is that there are sources who basically give you the full picture... and then there is the source who doesn't reveal that he was recommended for an intelligence mission by his wife, who works at the CIA in the very area he was sent to investigate. He also doesn't tell you that he serves as an unpaid adviser to one of the incumbent president's potential challengers in the next election, and uses your credulity to press his agenda. And when he is later revealed to have all the credibility of a carnival barker, your decision to believe him makes you look foolish. Yes, that's the type of source that can really burn you. At least reporters knew where Libby was coming from....

Link · American Politics | Iraq | Journalism | News Media · TrackBack (3)

Iraq Archives

from the annals of diplomacy

April 10, 2006 09:16 AM

The Russian government has assured Condoleeza Rice, in writing(!), that it did not tip-off Saddam Hussein to America's intentions on the eve of the Iraq war. As you will see below, Russia's denial struck Rice as firm and unequivocal. The emphases are mine.

According to the letter, “the Russian government does not believe that contact took place” between Saddam Hussein and the Russian ambassador to Baghdad at the time, Vladimir Titorenko, [Rice] said.

Lavrov “told me that he believes that any such contact would have been highly inappropriate for an ambassador of Russia,” she added.

“Of course, we will continue to look into the matter,” she told lawmakers, saying the U.S. administration was trying to verify the authenticity of documents which indicate Moscow tipped off the Iraqi dictator about U.S. plans for the March 20, 2003 invasion.

[Report orig. from AFP]

Link · Iraq | Middle East | Russia · TrackBack (51)

Iraq Archives

Great Moments in Humanitarianism

December 26, 2005 04:23 PM

Meet German "humanitarian" and former Iraq captive Susanne Osthoff, a Muslim convert with the forgiving soul of Jesus:

Osthoff described her captors as "poor people" and that [sic] she "cannot blame them for kidnapping her, as they cannot enter(Baghdad's heavily fortified) Green Zone to kidnap Americans." [AFP]

As the Prophet Muhammed might say, Well, they had to kidnap someone....

Link · Iraq | War on Terror · Comments (0) · TrackBack (29)

Iraq Archives

The most sophisticated readers in the world

December 16, 2005 06:50 AM

What's the most significant news in your world today? If, perhaps, it is that yesterday's first-ever parliamentary elections in Iraq produced an extraordinary turnout, a rebuke to local bullies and jihadists and much-improved prospects for democratic reformers in the Arab world... you probably don't read the New York Times. On the other hand, if you are impressed by advances in digital camera picture-quality, or turned on by the prospect of tasty champagne at asti spumante prices, you probably do!

Most E-Mailed Articles

Past 24 Hours | Past 7 Days | Past 30 Days

Updated every 15 minutes

1. TECHNOLOGY / CIRCUITS | December 15, 2005
David Pogue: Digital Photos Even a Miser Can Enjoy
By DAVID POGUE
Among sub-$300 cameras, it's clear that picture quality is improving and that screens are bigger, too.

2. OPINION | December 15, 2005
Op-Ed Contributor: The Rock Star's Burden
By PAUL THEROUX
Money and celebrity gestures won't solve Africa’s problems.

3. FASHION & STYLE / THURSDAY STYLES | December 15, 2005
A Happy Hipster Hanukkah
By STEPHANIE ROSENBLOOM
An increasing amount of irreverent and sometimes R-rated Hanukkah productions are popping up, largely in reaction to what many Jews say is an overwhelming amount of Christmas hoopla.

4. NATIONAL | December 15, 2005
See Baby Touch a Screen. but Does Baby Get It?
By TAMAR LEWIN
More parents are buying electronics for their young children, but there is little evidence that the devices are educational.

5. NEW YORK REGION | December 15, 2005
The Furry, 4-Legged Centerpiece of a Custody Battle in Court
By ANEMONA HARTOCOLLIS
The legal fight over a cat may be important to the vast system in New York that handles tens of thousands of stray and lost pets.

6. OPINION | December 15, 2005
The City Life: A Convenient Amnesia About Slavery
By BRENT STAPLES
By conveniently "forgetting" slavery, Northerners have historically absolved themselves of complicity while heaping blame onto the shoulders of the plantation South.

7. FASHION & STYLE / THURSDAY STYLES | December 15, 2005
Chronically Ill Patients Turn to Yoga for Relief
By CAROL E. LEE
People with chronic illnesses from AIDS and cancer to osteoporosis are increasingly turning to yoga classes that single out their specific ailments.

8. DINING & WINE | December 14, 2005
Wines of The Times: Champagne: How Low Can You Go?
By ERIC ASIMOV
The tasting panel was relieved and happy to find some cheap Champagnes that it could recommend enthusiastically.

9. HOME & GARDEN | December 15, 2005
House Proud: Glossy Skin, Vinyl-Clad Heart
By PAIGE WILLIAMS
The architect Charles Rose merged old and new by wrapping an old colonial house inside a cedar box and adding a modern wing.

10. BOOKS | December 15, 2005
After a Century, an American Writer's Library Will Go to America
By ALAN COWELL
The 2,600-volume Edith Wharton library has been sold to the custodians of the Mount, the writer's estate in Lenox, Mass., for $2.6 million.

[Continue to articles 11-25]

Link · Iraq · Comments (0) · TrackBack (57)

Iraq Archives

Bottom Story of the Day...

December 15, 2005 04:23 AM

...But top story on my Yahoo homepage:

Mortar Lands Near Green Zone As Polls Open By ROBERT H. REID, Associated Press Writer

Iraqis lined up amid tight security Thursday to vote in a historic parliamentary election the U.S. hopes will lay the groundwork for American troops to withdraw, with a mortar landing near the heavily fortified Green Zone just minutes after polls opened.

No injuries were reported in that blast, but a bomb killed a hospital guard and wounded two other people near a polling station in the northern city of Mosul. The violence underscored security concerns despite a promise by Sunni insurgent groups not to attack the polls....[snip]

Emphasis added. Got that? A mortar round landed near the Green Zone. Did anyone die? No. Was anyone hurt? No. Did it set off any of those annoying car alarms? Did any dogs begin barking excitedly?

One might get the impression that this AP reporter and his editors spend their day scouring Iraq for reports of explosions -- while in other news, millions of Iraqis went to the polls to elect the first representative government in the Arab World.

Link · Iraq | News Media · Comments (0) · TrackBack (6)

Iraq Archives

More of those 'Lying Liars'

December 3, 2005 03:48 AM

I've been stateside since Thanksgiving, so I'm a bit out of the swim of current events in Ukraine. But this rather brief report from London's Independent caught my eye.

KIEV, Ukraine -- A Ukrainian presidential bodyguard who exposed the country's biggest political scandal, involving murder, corruption, and illegal arms sales to Saddam Hussein has returned home, vowing to put his former boss, Leonid Kuchma, behind bars.

Major Mykola Melnychenko fled Kiev in 2000 after revealing excerpts from secret recordings he made of Mr Kuchma which implicated the president in the murder of a journalist who had exposed the corruption of Mr Kuchma's 10-year rule.

Major Melnychenko has been provided with a bodyguard by the Ukrainian intelligence services since his arrival on Wednesday from the US where he was given political asylum in 2003. He was with a former Ukrainian MP, Oleksandr Yalyaskevych, also granted US asylum after claiming Mr Kuchma's henchmen had tried to kill him....[snip]

Major Melnychenko says he saw Mr Kuchma taking bribes, and recorded him allegedly authorising sales of sophisticated defence systems to Iraq in contravention of UN sanctions.

Emphasis added. Ah, yes, another timely reminder that Saddam was not the properly chastened "dictator-in-a-box" of anti-war fantasy. In this particular case, his purchase included three so-called Kolchuga radar systems, an anti-stealth technology that can detect radar signals and electromagnetic pulses from warplanes at distances of hundreds of miles, while emitting no signal of its own (meaning pilots do not know they are being tracked). Presumably the goal here was to shoot down American and British warplanes that were, at the time, enforcing 'no-fly' zones north and south of Baghdad. The zones, you might recall, were intended to prevent any further massacre of Iraq's Kurdish and Shi'ite populations. But the specific purpose for which the radars were sought was moot, of course: International sanctions had forbidden Saddam from purchasing and acquiring any weaponry since 1990.

I guess in this instance, as in so many others, "containment" meant restraining one's impulse to collapse in gales of laughter at the impotence of the international sanctions imposed on Saddam.

Link · Iraq | Ukraine | War on Terror · Comments (0) · TrackBack (7)

Iraq Archives

Ethan's Bag of Predictions - Part I

December 1, 2005 02:03 AM

I predict... that not long from now, Iraqi journalists will start being killed by jihadists on the grounds that they must be in the pay of the United States, because their articles are favorable -- or simply not unfavorable -- toward the American military presence in that country. I further predict that when that time comes, the New York Times will editorialize that Iraq is falling further into chaos and plunging toward civil war. I predict, still further, that the paper's smug editorialists will note that our public diplomacy in the Middle East -- perhaps most notably our military's (formerly) secret attempts to counter the bold propagandists of the Arab and Muslim worlds -- has been a tragic boondoggle, because not only are the taxpayer-financed efforts not fooling anyone, but now Iraqi journalists are being killed because of this failure. I predict, even further, that no connection will be cited between these occurrances and the fact that American news media expose the country's clandestine operations to world scrutiny, and thus feed the dark suspicions of those most susceptible to the propaganda that the military has been trying to undercut.

Finally, I predict that after all the propaganda ops are exposed; after all the disguised charter operations, CIA fronts and secret jails are revealed; after every last photo snapped by some drooling half-wit at Abu Ghraib has been aired -- after all of it, the Times editorialists will demand, with exquisite sincerity, that Bush administration figures be punished for revealing Valerie Plame's employment at the CIA to journalists. After all, the disclosure may have harmed national security....

Link · Iraq | News Media | War on Terror · Comments (32) · TrackBack (99)