You are herecontent / Lt. General Odom Speaks Truth in Basement of U.S. Capitol. Dome Shakes.

Lt. General Odom Speaks Truth in Basement of U.S. Capitol. Dome Shakes.


Rep. Woolsey and 15 Other Congress Members Hold Hearing on Iraq
By David Swanson

Photos. -- Video at PoliticsTV.

Present (whole time or briefly, in order of arrival): Representatives Lee, Woolsey, Jackson-Lee, Rothman, Kilpatrick, Conyers, Hinchey, Owens, Kaptor, Hoyer (Hoyer!?, yes Hoyer, but he left quickly and did not get a chance to speak), Tierney, Farr, Watson, Delahunt, Shakowsky.

Corporate media present: apparently none.

Panel 1: Witnesses: Lt. Gen. William Odom, Dr. Paul Pillar.

live blogging below...

Pillar spoke first. He addressed the question of whether the disaster in Iraq is the result of poor execution or of the initial decision to go in at all. "Most of what we are seeing," he said, "and in particular the communal violence, is an almost inevitable result of having ousted the dictator Saddam Hussein."

Odom spoke second and addressed points of argumentation that he hears too often and is tired of hearing, including being told to ignore the past and focus on the future, to ignore how we got into Iraq and only talk about what to do from here on. Unless, Odom said, we discuss whose interests this war served, we cannot decide what to do. It served no U.S. interests. It served the interests of al Qaeda and Iran.

Al Qaeda recruiting declined in 2002, Odom said, but spiked after the U.S. invaded -- rose in Asia as well as in the Middle East. And Iraq is a great training ground for terrorists now. In addition, Odom said, a wedge is being driven between the United States and its European allies. "Osama understands that; we seem not to." The invasion of Iraq, Odom said, probably saved al Qaeda from ceasing to exist.

"Iran's clerics," Odom added, "must have been equally surprised and delighted." Terrorists can now train in Iraq and engage in violence in Israel.

The longer the war goes on, Odom stressed, the more it benefits al Qaeda and Iran.

During questions and answers Odom addressed the notion that U.S. troops need to do a better job of training Iraqi troops. If we do that, he said, the military will take over and install a dictatorship. The problem is not one of soldiers' skills, he said, but of political loyalties.

Congresswoman Barbara Lee said that the House is voting today on more money for the war, and that she will vote against it, but that she is glad to have successfully included in the bill a stipulation that no money can be spent on permanent U.S. bases in Iraq during 2007.

Odom again spoke about what would happen when/if the United States pulls out. The aftermath is going to be great, he said. It was going to be great the day you went in, but the longer you wait the greater it will be. And, Odom added to noticable effect, this will be the greatest strategic defeat in American history.

Congressman Rothman said that he had voted for the war because he had believed Bush and Rumsfeld, and that he now understood they had been lying. He said he saw the same approach now underway with Iran, and that he thought it was aimed at the coming U.S. elections.

Odom again spoke of leaving Iraq and said "It takes a very high level of ignorance to believe America can leave behind in Iraq any government that will not be anti-American."

But Odom argued that staying longer in Iraq would make things worse, whereas getting out would dramatically improve America's standing in the world. Our standing went up as soon as we got out of Vietnam, he said.

"Beating the war drums on Iran," Odom said, "is a disaster that will make this one look small."

Odom did not hesitate to criticise the Congress Members in the room. He recalled the day on which Republicans in Congress, in response to Rep. John Murtha's bill, proposed a bill to simply withdraw from Iraq. The Democrats scattered in fear, Odom said. He recommended that they should have introduced a bill to send 600,000 more troops to Iraq.

Congressman Conyers replied that the Republican bill did not allow amendments, so the Democrats could not have done that.

Odom said that the most important thing for the United States to do now is to talk to Iran, a nation with which we have many common interests. Both nations, Odom said, oppose al Qaeda. One wants to sell oil, the other wants to buy. Iran's government hated Saddam Hussein and should appreciate what the US did. "We have two issues," Odom said, "Hezbollah and nukes, and they're going to get nuclear weapons - there's nothing we can do about that."

Conyers thanked Odom and Pillar but said that he and his colleagues who agree with him cannot convince other Congress Members. "There's one thing that gets to members, and that's constituents...." In the end, conyers said, the question is how do we get more of our people to tell their representatives that the Progressive Caucus members are right?

Pillar drew a comparison between Iraq and Afghanistan. The jihad in Afghanistan for 10 years against the Soviet Union served to train terrorists, he said, and we are still experiencing the results. Iraq is now that training ground, and we may see results for many years, he said.

Rep. Hinchey asked Odom "How do we get out?" Odom's reply came without a pause: "Well, the Constitution gives the House the right to impeach."

Photos.

_________________________
_________________________

NEWS from

CONGRESSWOMAN LYNN WOOLSEY

6th District, California

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Chris Shields

September 26, 2006 202-225-5187

WOOLSEY, COLLEAGUES HEAR TESTIMONY ON COST OF CONTINUED OCCUPATION OF IRAQ

Washington, D.C - One of the leading national figures in the anti-war movement, Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey (D-Petaluma) was joined by 15 of her colleagues today, including Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), and Oakland's Barbara Lee in hearing testimony on the cost of the continued occupation of Iraq.

"This series of discussions, quite frankly, have been launched because I repeatedly requested for formal hearings from the relevant House committees and subcommittees...and was met with stone silence," Woolsey said in her prepared remarks. "They weren't interested in asking the tough questions, or in hearing anything other than spin and happy talk.

"I didn't think that was acceptable," Woolsey continued, and "given everything Americans have sacrificed for this occupation -- including nearly 2,700 of their fellow citizens - I believe we're entitled to some straight answers. If the majority party in Congress won't perform its oversight responsibilities, I guess we'll just do it for them."

This is the third in a series of forums that Woolsey has organized on the occupation of Iraq. Today's diverse group of panelists included General William Odom, who served as head of the NSA under President Reagan, and Dr. Paul Pillar who served in the CIA for 30 years. They addressed declining American influence in the region, the inadequate state of our military readiness, and the situation in Iraq, respectively. The panel also addressed the financial and opportunity costs of the continued occupation, a theme echoed by Woolsey:

"Congress has already appropriated $317 billion for the invasion and occupation [of Iraq], a staggering sum amounting to roughly $11 million every hour of every day," Woolsey said. "Of course in 2003, no one in the Bush Administration was prepared to admit that the price tag would climb this high. Had Americans been given the facts, about both the money involved and the lack of WMDs, the President would never have received the green light to go into Iraq in the first place."

Also on the panel were Chloe O'Gara (Save the Children), Anita Dancs (National Priorities Project), Peter Laufer (author) and Sergeant Patrick Cambell (Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America). Other members who attended include: Carolyn Kilpatrick; Sheila Jackson-Lee; Steve Rothman; John Conyers; Maurice Hinchey; Major Owens; Marcy Kaptur; Sam Farr; Diane Watson; John Tierney; Rush Holt, Jan Schakowsky and William Delahunt.

###

Tags

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Robin Cook
Friday July 8, 2005
The Guardian
“Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. Inexplicably, and with disastrous consequences, it never appears to have occurred to Washington that once Russia was out of the way, Bin Laden's organisation would turn its attention to the west.
The danger now is that the west's current response to the terrorist threat compounds that original error. So long as the struggle against terrorism is conceived as a war that can be won by military means, it is doomed to fail. The more the west emphasises confrontation, the more it silences moderate voices in the Muslim world who want to speak up for cooperation. Success will only come from isolating the terrorists and denying them support, funds and recruits, which means focusing more on our common ground with the Muslim world than on what divides us.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1523838,00.html

I was just reading this post when it dawned on me that "terrorists" is just a different name for the same concept. When I studied Colonial American History, the colonists became disenchanted with the Crown's rule being imposed from across the ocean. The "patriots" banded together and were considered "freedom fighters".

I studied 20th Century History and read and learned about many "revolutions" in various areas of the world. Most patterned after the American Revolution. Freedom loving people seeking release from the bonds of oppression.

I experienced the news in the 60's and 70's reporting about "guerilla warfare" in southeast Asia. A loose translation for "guerilla" would be something like "warrior for freedom".

It becomes a matter of perspective. Being a knee-jerk supporter of the regime in many cases blinds one's eyes from seriously understandingWHYthe "terrorists", "jihadists", "rebels", "patriots",
"guerillas", etc. feel social and economic oppression. What is their grievance and what can be done about it? Is that asking too much? To understand and respect a people's culture?

Colonial Americans, colonists of all different ethnic and religious origins bound together to forge a better nation employing ideas from various philosophical bases. America wrote the book on developing a nation out of nothing and now America is throwing it all away as the wealthy elites want it all for themselves. Or so it would seem.

How did WE THE PEOPLE allow this rogue group of wealthy, privileged spoiled brats con us to the brink of destruction? Odom should form a Continental Armed Force to recruit WE THE PEOPLE and military members of our ilk to march to the White House and forcibly remove the occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and place him under arrest for crimes against WE THE PEOPLE and our governing foundation, THE CONSTITUTION, you remember George, THAT GODDAMNED PIECE OF PAPER!

I couldn't agree more; dealing with problem by gaining an understnding of the problem instead of lashing out like a 3 year old. What a concept!

Who are we kidding ? We just want to give therapy to the terrorists.

I'd like to give Rove some "wall-to-wall" therapy; fat little freaking Nazi! Come and get me!

"America wrote the book on developing a nation out of nothing"

I would like to make a correction to this quote; America did not form a nation out of nothing, nothing could be further from the truth. When you look at the American revolution and then a few short years later the French revolution, the results were very different. In America the revolution gave birth to a new vibrant nation, in France the revolution resulted in chaos and it took years to sort things out, some would say they are still trying to sort things out.

The difference was in America it was a functioning colonial government based on all the progress of the British systems such as the Magna Carta etc. that rebeled against the crown. When the British were finally kicked out there was no power vacuum, the existing colonial government continued on, in fact it had never stoped functioning. In France things were different, it was the people out of power who rebeled against the only government they had, when that government was destroyed there was nothing to immediately take its place, they were starting from scratch; sounds a little like Iraq and with the same results, go figure.

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it!

Beautifully stated, where can I sign up????

"Lying" the Nation to war against the innocent People of Iraq, like Bush did, willfully and deceitfully, is "despicable", a treacherous "act of treason" against our Great Nation, and instead of complicit "silence", his rubber-stamped Republican Congress should uphold their Oath and honor the Constitution, by "impeaching", and "removing" this "usurper", this "hereditary king", from Office, without delay!

Odom has impeccable conservative credentials (Reagan Administration and Hudson Institute) and experience credentials. These could make this a disastrous story for the Republicans who still barf "cut and run" whenever they can. Odom's response to the "cut and run" claim is devastating.

May I suggest that everyone who reads the article to send it AND the transcript of Odom's testimony to Chris Matthews, Wolf Blitzer, Soledad O'Brien, Tim Russert and whatever other newspeople they see fit. Those I mentioned are starting to confront Republican legislators and administration flacks much more aggressively than they have ever done.

For example, I saw Bill Frist's eyelids start to flutter faster than a hummingbird's wings the other day when Chris Matthews kept challenging his claims. He almost achieved liftoff. Matthews did the same yesterday to Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) yesterday, and she reacted with just as much visible discomfort.

The more they are pushed to cover this, the more likely they are to do so.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Speaking Events

David Swanson at St. Michael’s College, Colchester, VT, October 5, 2016.

David Swanson in Fairbanks, Alaska, October 22, 2016.

Find Events Here.

CHOOSE LANGUAGE

Support This Site

Donate.

Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.

 

Sponsors:

Speaking Truth to Empire

***

Families United

***

Ray McGovern

***

Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.