Today’s Must Read

Many left bloggers in America and in the UK wrote about the blatant theft of billions of dollars in cash and antiquities by US contractors and others in Iraq while it was happeniing; we also wrote about the fact that the looting was only made possible by the incompetence and collusion of the fundy-staffed, Paul Bremer-led Coalition Provincial Authority (aka ‘What Liberty U students did on their gap year“).

But, as has become usual in Bush’s America, it’s taken years for big media to actually notice ( or to be more accurate, to have the guts to write about it) and to get the story to Mrs and Mrs Average Glossy Mag Buyer.

Vanity Fair’s account of the mercenary free-for-all following the illegal invasion of a sovereign nation (however odious its regime), Billions Over Baghdad, although it’s a day late and a dollar short will, I hope, deeply shock those American voters who still have residual faith in the probity of their politicians and government officials and in the good intentions and morals of the senior ranks of their military. These are not the Good Guys.

[…]

Over the next year, a compliant Congress gave $1.6 billion to Bremer to administer the C.P.A. This was over and above the $12 billion in cash that the C.P.A. had been given to disburse from Iraqi oil revenues and unfrozen Iraqi funds. Few in Congress actually had any idea about the true nature of the C.P.A. as an institution. Lawmakers had never discussed the establishment of the C.P.A., much less authorized it—odd, given that the agency would be receiving taxpayer dollars. Confused members of Congress believed that the C.P.A. was a U.S. government agency, which it was not, or that at the very least it had been authorized by the United Nations, which it had not. One congressional funding measure makes reference to the C.P.A. as “an entity of the United States Government”—highly inaccurate. The same congressional measure states that the C.P.A. was “established pursuant to United Nations Security Council resolutions”—just as inaccurate. The bizarre truth, as a U.S. District Court judge would point out in an opinion, is that “no formal document … plainly establishes the C.P.A. or provides for its formation.”

This isn’t just about the criminality and greed of the Bush administration but also about the incompetence of Congress and the corruption of the civil service and the military.

Not only did the institutions of government fail to stop the criminality, they allowed it to happen.

Even if individual congresspersons, civil servants or army officers didn’t personally benefit from the smash and grab they didn’t speak out, except in very rare cases: Bunnatine Greenhouse, for example, should be a national hero but instead she’s demoted and vilified.

Those who knew what was happening and failed to speak out failed in their duty and are therefore in it up to their necks, as much as any apparatchik or noncom with a handy cash sum stashed in the Cayman Islands.

Accountable really to no one, its finances “off the books” for U.S. government purposes, the C.P.A. provided an unprecedented opportunity for fraud, waste, and corruption involving American government officials, American contractors, renegade Iraqis, and many others. In its short life more than $23 billion would pass through its hands. And that didn’t include potentially billions more in oil shipments the C.P.A. neglected to meter. At stake was an ocean of cash that would evaporate whenever the C.P.A. did. All parties understood that there was a sell-by date, and that it was everyone for himself. An Iraqi hospital administrator told The Guardian of England that, when he arrived to sign a contract, the army officer representing the C.P.A. had crossed out the original price and doubled it. “The American officer explained that the increase (more than $1 million) was his retirement package.” Alan Grayson, a Washington, D.C., lawyer for whistle-blowers who have worked for American contractors in Iraq, says simply that during that first year under the C.P.A. the country was turned into “a free-fraud zone.”

Iraq has been the biggest home invasion of all time. Murder, rape, torture, looting; Genghis Khan would be proud. But it’s not just Iraqi money that these slime are stealing, though, it’s yours too, if yoiu’re a US or UK taxpayer – Bush has just asked Congress for another 50 billion dollars more and the UK has spent 6.6 billionpounds so far. Who knows into whose pockets it goes?

America may not be the Good Guys their self-image tells them they are, but then neither are we British and there is another, untold story here.

What was the role of the British military and diplomats in the CPA? They were as deeply involved as the Americans in the invasion – what were they doing while this as happening, sitting on their hands and going ‘Oh, dear”?

Take Basra: who handled the money for Basra province? Where’s it gone and to whom and for what? Has there even been an accounting?

I note that British diplomats, in concert with the US, pressured the UN for the CPA to be accepted as a valid interim government. They worked hand in hand with the Pentagon: do we really think our diplomatic staff and senior military had no inkling of the wholesale theft that was going on? Can we believe that if they did know, that they were so morally spotless as not to have been tempted to have a dip themselves? Of course it may not have been necessary to be quite as crude as that: there are other ways to benefit from criminality. Turning a blind eye can be quite rewarding, as our country’s record on rendition has shown.

But surely, if there are any malefactors, heaven forbid, in the ranks of our government, diplomatic corps or military, good old British justice will sort it out. Won’t it?

I mean, just look at the way George Galloway has been hounded by New Labour for being a bit equivocal reporting a donor in his paperwork for the Mariam Fund (total value 1.4 million) – that’s how punctilious New Labour is. They’d never do something sio venal as to take cash for honours or anything like that, oh no.

Shorter Uk government – criminals and war profiteers? What criminals and war profiteers? We’re British! We’re honourable!

Hardly. Some of our recently retired generals and diplomats are now issuing their own revisionist versions of recent history – what they say, in short, is that they were against the invasion all long, really, and it was all the fault of those naughty Americans. They didn’t want to do it – a big boy made them do it and ran away, wasn’t us, guv, we said it was a bad idea.

Unfortunately for untold thousands of dead Iraqis they weren’t so honourable as to say so at the time. Only now, when there’s autobiographies to be sold and the information is of no earthly use do they come forward. There’s the honour of our glorious military.

Meanwhile the Iraq war continues to be highly profitable – for some.

Aegis turnover soared from £554,000 in 2003 to £62m last year – three quarters through work in Iraq, including its role coordinating all private military and security firms operating in the country. Aegis is led by Lieutenant-Colonel Tim Spicer, who broke a UN arms embargo on Sierra Leone with his former company Sandline International, and was jailed in Papua New Guinea for earlier activities. The firm DSC, now part of British company ArmorGroup, was implicated in providing intelligence that helped Colombian death squads identify groups opposed to a BP oil pipeline project. ArmorGroup, which trebled its turnover from $71m in 2001 to $233.2m last year, typifies the private military sector in hiring former government officials and officers to wield political influence. Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the former UK defence and foreign secretary, is a non-executive director of ArmorGroup. In 2005 the Foreign Office and the Department for International Development awarded the firm armed security contracts in the Afghan capital Kabul, as well as in the Iraqi cities Baghdad and Basra, together with control of the Iraqi police monitoring programme.

Aegis’s non-executive directors include ex-UK defence minister Nicholas Soames, as well as Lord Inge, former chief of defence staff, and Roger Wheeler, earlier professional head of the British army as chief of the general staff.

That’s the kind of moneymaking from war that goes on all the time, but no-one complains and if they do well, they’re just whiny peacenik hippies who want to curb free trade.

The difference in Iraq is that war profiteering, instead of being a covert operation, has been carried out in the open with actual cash money and a blatancy that takes the breath away.

The big question, to my mind, is if, when those alleged to be the ‘good guys’ commit crimes of such magnitude, who, if anyone, is to step in and enforce the law? The Democrats don’t seem to have the bottle for it and neither do either of the British opposition parties.

This is a question that no-one seems to want to answer, because it would mean questioning the fundamental bases of our entire political systems, on both sides of the Atlantic. That way lies revolution – and that would never do.

“We Have Met The Enemy And It Is Us”

How scared is Bushco of the public?

These Seattle news pictures from Daniel Kirkdorffer at The Road To 2008 illustrate pretty starkly the current inability of the average American to practice their much-vaunted right to public free speech against an unpopular president and his policies without being threatened by armed goons.

The pictures were taken as Bush was on a private fundraisng tour on purely Republican business, nothing to do with his presidential responsibilities at all: not only is Bush misusing police as his personal stormtroopers (although they seem perfectly content in the role, which is what I’d find most worrying if I were American) he’s also misusing public tax money for party political purposes.

When Bush Starts Turning Weapons On Us

The photo I posted Monday night of the police officer pointing a weapon at protestors of Bush’s visit to Bellevue is getting a lot of notice.

Man of The People (AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)

Some have wondered whether it was photoshopped. It wasn’t. This was taken in downtown Bellevue, Washington. Shopping Town Washington some might call it. Clean skyscrappers, Hummer delight, charmlessly wealthy.

I snagged the photo from Yahoo. Here’s another:


(AP Photo/Elaine Thompson)

This is disturbing on so many levels. We’re in a fight for our civil liberties. We’re trying to save our Constitution. We’re opposed to Bush’s Iraq occupation. We’re sick of the lying and corruption. And now we’re targets at the end of a gun point.

These people are the targets:

The Targets (John Lok / The Seattle Times

Democracy and Freedom in the Homeland, Bush style.

Tsk, whiny libruls, what’s their beef? Can’t take a little repression?

Now see, if they were only good Americans Republicans, instead of a bunch of islam-loving, first-amendment-respecting, god-hating rabble, they’d know this is all SOP for a reigning monarch, as laid out in the super-seekrit anti-protest handbook given out to supporters by the White House. Trouble is it’s so super-seekit that that the godless anarchist Bush-haters UnAmericans protestors can’t see it. It’s only for the Chosen Ones, so they can protect their Chimperor:

The “Presidential Advance Manual,” dated October 2002 with the stamp “Sensitive — Do Not Copy,” was released under subpoena to the American Civil Liberties Union as part of a lawsuit filed on behalf of two people arrested for refusing to cover their anti-Bush T-shirts at a Fourth of July speech at the West Virginia State Capitol in 2004. The techniques described have become familiar over the 6 1/2 years of Bush’s presidency, but the manual makes it clear how organized the anti-protest policy really is.

The lawsuit was filed by Jeffery and Nicole Rank, who attended the Charleston event wearing shirts with the word “Bush” crossed out on the front; the back of his shirt said “Regime Change Starts at Home,” while hers said “Love America, Hate Bush.” Members of the White House event staff told them to cover their shirts or leave, according to the lawsuit. They refused and were arrested, handcuffed and briefly jailed before local authorities dropped the charges and apologized. The federal government settled the First Amendment case last week for $80,000, but with no admission of wrongdoing.

The manual demonstrates “that the White House has a policy of excluding and/or attempting to squelch dissenting viewpoints from presidential events,” said ACLU lawyer Jonathan Miller. “Individuals should have the right to express their opinion to the president, even if it’s not a favorable one.”

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said that he could not discuss the manual because it is an issue in two other lawsuits.

The manual offers advance staffers and volunteers who help set up presidential events guidelines for assembling crowds. Those invited into a VIP section on or near the stage, for instance, must be ” extremely supportive of the Administration,” it says. While the Secret Service screens audiences only for possible threats, the manual says, volunteers should examine people before they reach security checkpoints and look out for signs. Make sure to look for “folded cloth signs,” it advises.

To counter any demonstrators who do get in, advance teams are told to create “rally squads” of volunteers with large hand-held signs, placards or banners with “favorable messages.” Squads should be placed in strategic locations and “at least one squad should be ‘roaming’ throughout the perimeter of the event to look for potential problems,” the manual says.

“These squads should be instructed always to look for demonstrators,” it says. “The rally squad’s task is to use their signs and banners as shields between the demonstrators and the main press platform. If the demonstrators are yelling, rally squads can begin and lead supportive chants to drown out the protestors (USA!, USA!, USA!). As a last resort, security should remove the demonstrators from the event site.”

How? With the use of automatic weapons, presumably. Why else be toting them and threatening the crowd? “Constitution? Rights? What’s one of those? What are you, some kind of terrorist?”

Advance teams are advised not to worry if protesters are not visible to the president or cameras: “If it is determined that the media will not see or hear them and that they pose no potential disruption to the event, they can be ignored. On the other hand, if the group is carrying signs, trying to shout down the President, or has the potential to cause some greater disruption to the event, action needs to be taken immediately to minimize the demonstrator’s effect.”

Read whole article

Immediate action? Oh, you mean like at Kent State. Yes, that worked so well last time.

Modern Mobsterism, or Republican Ratfuckery or “Nice Family You Got there. Shame If Anything Happened to It…”

A NY state Republican political thug ‘consultant’, Roger J. Stone Jr., is alleged to have been harassing the 83 year old father of the Democratic attorney general, Elliot Spitzer, with threatening late night phone calls – traceable directly back to aforesaid thug “consultant”.

True to GOP form, Stone is denying everything despite a lot of alleged proof against him. As is his right, of course.

But Stone’s not satisfied with barely-believable, tissue-thin denials, oh no – he’s doing the classic Republican projection thing and accusing Democrats of setting him up by invading his apartment and using his phone:

Mr. Stone, a seasoned practitioner of hard-edged politics who worked for Presidents Richard M. Nixon and Ronald Reagan and for George W. Bush in the 2000 recount battle, adamantly denied the allegation in an interview, calling it “the ultimate dirty trick.” He asserted that allies of Governor Spitzer may have gained access to a phone in his Manhattan apartment to make the threatening call.

The message, left at Bernard Spitzer’s Manhattan office just before 10 p.m. on Aug. 6, says that Mr. Spitzer, 83, a wealthy real estate developer, would be “compelled by the Senate sergeant at arms” to testify about “shady campaign loans” he made to his son during Eliot Spitzer’s unsuccessful campaign for attorney general in 1994.

Mr. Winner’s committee has been holding hearings into a scheme by some of Governor Spitzer’s top aides to use the State Police to embarrass the Senate Republican leader, Joseph L. Bruno. Senate Republicans have said they were considering reviewing Bernard Spitzer’s 1994 loans to his son.

“If you resist this subpoena, you will be arrested and brought to Albany,” the message says, according to a transcript. The message also calls Governor Spitzer a “phony” and a “psycho.”

Bernard Spitzer’s lawyers hired Kroll Associates, the private investigative firm, to trace the message, and their report was included with the letter to Mr. Winner. The firm traced the number that appeared on Mr. Spitzer’s caller identification system, linking it to listings under the name of Mr. Stone’s wife, Nydia.

“The review of publicly available records,” the report says, “strongly suggests that the number is controlled by Roger Stone.”

“Nice family you got there, shame if anything happened to it…”

Who is Roger Stone? Here’s his entry in Sourcewatch:

Roger J. Stone, Jr. is a long-time Republican dirty-tricks operative who led the mob that shut down the Miami-Dade County recount and helped make George W. Bush president in 2000. He was also a campaign strategist during the presidential campaigns of Presidents Nixon, Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush. He is the chairman of the Fort Hill Group, a Washington, D.C.-based public affairs firm.

Stone was also a strategist for the 1981 and 1985 campaigns for governor of New Jersey by Thomas H. Kean, who was later appointed by President Bush to chair the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9-11 Commission). [1]

During the 2004 presidential primary, Stone served as a behind-the-scenes consultant to black firebrand Al Sharpton’s campaign to win the Democratic Party nomination, prompting speculation that Sharpton’s campaign was actually a stealth operation to weaken the party’s chances of winning in the general election. Writing in the Village Voice, Wayne Barrett noted that Stone was “financing, staffing, and orchestrating the presidential campaign of Reverend Al Sharpton. … Sharpton has a little-noticed history of Republican machinations inconsistent with his fiery rhetoric. … [A]ny Sharpton-connected outrage against the party could either lower black turnout in several key close states, or move votes to Bush.” [2]

The New York Times has also reported on the strange-bedfellows relationship between Stone and Sharpton, noting that Stone was behind several of Sharpton’s most visible campaign tactics, including scrutiny of primary candidate Howard Dean’s record of minority appointees when he was governor of Vermont. [3]

In September 2004, rumors circulated that Stone was the original source of apparently forged documents related to the National Guard service of U.S. President George W. Bush. Stone denied the charge. “I have nothing whatsoever to do with this,” he said. “I’m a firm believer in political hardball, but I draw the line at forged documents.”

Whole entry

Nice guy, huh?

I have no idea what the rights and wrongs, if any, of Spitzer’s campaign funding troubles are, although I expect the late Steve Gillliard could’ve demystified it in a few short pithy sentences.

Even though the Democrats are hardly clean themselves it hardly matters in the face of such blatant and unrepentant bullying of a family member to put pressure on a politician.

What’s next? The kidnap and ransom of small children? Ears in boxes? The language is violent enough.

In the message, the caller says, referring to a potential subpoena: “There is not a goddamn thing your phony, psycho, piece-of-shit son can do about it. Bernie, your phony loans are about to catch up with you. You will be forced to tell the truth and the fact that your son’s a pathological liar will be known to all.”

Read more…

It’s common in Europe to portray New York city and state poliitics as a real world analogue of a tv drama with an operatic title (see how delicately I tiptoe around the potential libel of a whole population, some of them Italian and touchy with it), crossed with a particularly lurid episode of Law & Order. But after a 70-odd year diet of movies glorifying gangsterism and violence as the the epitome of the free market in action, can you blame us?

But our recieved wisdom is out of date in certain respects.These days the mob aren’t wiseguys in slightly-too-loud-suits with vulgar accents: no, they wear Brooks Brothers suits and Hermes ties and are attached to political lobbying firms and go to church and the country club on Sunday. They’re respectable consultants – but although the faces and the brand image may have changed, the criminal methods are just the same – lie, cheat, steal, blackmail, and when all else fails threaten violence. Dirty tricks and ratfuckery are the regular MO of the NYGOP.

Take former Westchester County DA, Jeannine Pirro, who hired Judith Regan’s corrupt former lover (remember them screwing in the apartment for the resting 9/11 firefighters as the ruins still smouldered), Giuliani blue-eyed boy and former candidate for Homeland security chief Bernie Kerik to bug her allegedly adulterous husband’s boat so she could divorce him and run for governor.

This is the woman that the Republicans put up for NY state attorney general against Spitzer, the guy whose father their goons are now harassing:

Jeanine Pirro was desperate to prove her husband was cheating on her.

She came under the scrutiny of six different law enforcement agencies, including the New York Police Department, the city’s Department of Investigation and prosecutors in the Bronx and Westchester.

According to documents now in the hands of several defense attorneys, Pirro and the former New York City Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik were apparently talking about planting a hidden device aboard her husband’s boat. Her possible motive may have been to see if he was having an affair.

Sources told NewsChannel 4 that in one conversation, Pirro complained that one of Kerik’s employees was reluctant to board Albert Pirro’s boat.

Jeanine Pirro suggests, “We can just simply say, if there is an issue, that I am redecorating it for our anniversary.” She complains that Kerik’s man is, “uncomfortable with that.”

Kerik responded by saying, “But Jeanine, I’m having the same f——g problem with everybody. Everybody is panic stricken because it’s you. I’ve gone out on a limb. I had two other people looking at this. It’s a problem.”

Pirro said, “What am I supposed to do, Bernie? Watch him f–k her every night? What am I supposed to do? I can go on the boat. I’ll put the f—–g thing on myself.”

Minutes later, sources said Kerik called a contact at Giuliani Partners, former Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s consulting firm, asking him to find a recording device.

Sources said the FBI and Justice Department have been asked to look into whether Pirro and Kerik also might have violated federal laws.

In the wiretapped conversations, Pirro appeared to discuss how her husband’s alleged indiscretions hurt her politically.

Without her husband, sources said she told Kerik, “I move into the governor’s mansion.”

Republican politicians are now the acceptable face of organised crime. Mob loyalty runs right through the GOP from the top to the bottom, like the lettering in a stick of rock.

Democratic inaction works

It seems the Democrats might just have the presidency locked up for the foreseeable future, if Jamie Carville is to be believed:

A late July poll for Democracy Corps, a non-profit polling company, shows that a generic Democratic presidential candidate now wins voters under 30 years old by 32 percentage points. The Republican lead among younger white non-college-educated men, who supported President George W. Bush by a margin of 19 percentage points three years ago, has shrunk to 2 percentage points. Ideological divisions between the Republican party and young voters are growing. Young voters generally favour larger government providing more services, 68 per cent to 28 per cent. On every issue, from the budget to national security, young voters responded overwhelmingly that Democrats would do a better job in government.

It is not just Democracy Corps that has found this. A host of new polls and surveys over the course of the past few months has served as a harbinger of a rocky 2008 election for Republicans.

The March poll from the Pew Research Center showed that 50 per cent of Americans identify as Democrats while only 35 per cent say they are Republican. The June NBC-Wall Street Journal poll showed 52 per cent of Americans would prefer a Democratic president while only 31 per cent would support a Republican, the largest gap in the 20-year history of the survey.

Now earlier this week I talked about what seemed to be the Democratic tactic of not doing much to oppose Bush and to let the mounting disgust of the voters for him get them elected; this may just be the vindication of this tactic.

Had the Democrats opposed Bush more effectively earlier, for example on the War on Iraq, the American voters might not have become as disgusted with Bush and the Republicans as much and the Democratic lead would therefore be much smaller. Also, as I’ve also argued before, the Democratic leadership essentially agrees with quite a few of the politics Bush has enacted over the past six-seven years, not the least being the War on Iraq.

By mounting a token opposition on these points, by playing the victim in the Republican’s demonisation strategy, the Democratic Party’s leadership has tried to have its cake and eat it too: get unpopular policies enacted without being blamed for them…