You are herecontent / Editorial: Karl Rove/Real issue is the case for war

Editorial: Karl Rove/Real issue is the case for war

Minneapolis Star-Tribune
July 14, 2005

Did White House political adviser Karl Rove deliberately reveal the identity of an undercover CIA operative? Only two people can answer that question, and neither one is talking: Rove himself and special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who is investigating the question.

Sooner or later, we probably will get an answer. Fitzgerald has been so aggressive in this investigation -- to the point of jailing a New York Times reporter who refused to reveal her confidential sources -- that indictments are reasonably likely.

In the meantime, it's important to look beyond the immediate political spectacle in Washington -- White House spokesman Scott McClellan finally confronted by reporters who feel abused and lied to -- to the reason Rove was talking to a reporter about ex-diplomat Joseph Wilson at all.

The real issue, more serious and less glitzy than whether Bush will stand by his political adviser, is the extraordinary efforts the Bush administration made to protect a case for war in Iraq from all contradictory evidence -- in effect, as the British spymaster Sir Richard Dearlove put it, to "fix" the facts and intelligence so they would support a decision already made.

Enter Wilson and his wife, Valerie Plame, an undercover CIA operative specializing in weapons of mass destruction. As Wilson tells it, a question arose at the CIA early in 2002, prompted by an inquiry from Vice President Dick Cheney's office, about reports that Iraq had purchased uranium for nuclear weapons from the African country of Niger, where Wilson previously had served. When someone was needed to travel to Niger, Plame apparently told her superiors that her husband had good contacts there. CIA officials talked with Wilson and decided he should be the one to make the trip.

In late February of 2002 Wilson made the trip, talked with numerous people in Niger, including the U.S. ambassador, and concluded there was nothing to reports of an Iraq-Niger connection. He briefed officials at both the CIA and State Department on his conclusions.

In January 2003, however, President Bush asserted an Iraq-Africa uranium connection in his State of the Union message. Subsequently, it turned out that Bush was indeed referring to Niger. The Niger-Iraq connection became one of the pillars in Bush's case for war with Iraq.

After the start of the war, Wilson wrote a lengthy op-ed piece for the New York Times laying out the facts of his trip and saying he had "little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq's nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

Five days later, Rove told Time reporter Matt Cooper he should "not get too far out on Wilson." His trip to Niger, Rove said, wasn't approved by Cheney or CIA Director George Tenet. Cooper wrote to his boss, "It was, KR said, wilson's wife, who apparently works at the agency on wmd issues who authorized the trip."

Three days later, columnist Robert Novak identified Plame as a CIA operative and said two "senior administration officials" told him Plame suggested sending her husband. About the same time, a confidential source also told a Washington Post reporter that the trip was a "boondoggle" arranged by Plame.

This is a classic Rove technique: undercut a critic by planting the notion that he was off to Africa on a lark arranged by his wife. Rove's history as a rough political player is well-documented. But this wasn't about a political campaign; this was about a serious question of national security and the justification for a difficult war.

It also wasn't true. On July 22, Newsday reported that a "senior intelligence officer confirmed that Plame was a directorate of operations undercover officer who worked 'alongside' the operations officers who asked her husband to travel to Niger. But he said she did not recommend her husband to undertake the Niger assignment." This senior intelligence officer also told Newsday that it was incorrect to suggest " 'she was the one who was cooking this up.' " Besides, he said, " 'We paid his airfare. But to go to Niger is not exactly a benefit. Most people you'd have to pay big bucks to go there.' " The CIA always said Plame did not recommend her husband.

It is instructive to remember that the investigation into who revealed Plame's identity was initiated by Tenet, not by administration critics. Remember also that Wilson was correct; ultimately the White House had to retract Bush's State of the Union statement on the Niger connection.

In addition to discrediting critics of the Niger connection, the Bush administration, through the actions of John Bolton -- now nominee to be U.N. ambassador -- sought to intimidate intelligence analysts who objected to conclusions about Iraq's WMD, and to get a U.N. chemical weapons official fired so he wouldn't be able to send inspectors back to Iraq, where they might disprove more of the case for war.

In the scheme of things, whether Rove revealed Plame's identity, deliberately or not, matters less than actions by Rove, Bolton, Cheney and others to phony up a case for war that has gone badly, has cost thousands of lives plus hundreds of billions of dollars, and has, a majority of Americans now believe, left the United States less safe from terrorism rather than more.

That's the indictment which should matter most.


Comment viewing options

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

"At home, the job of a president is to help cultures change. The culture needs to be changed. I call it, so people can understand what I'm talking about, changing the culture from one that says, "If it feels good, do it, and if you've got a problem, blame somebody else," to a culture in which each of us understands we're responsible for the decisions we make in life. I call it the responsibility era. … I said that when I was governor of Texas. As a matter of fact, I've been saying that ever since I got into politics. This is one of the reasons I got into politics in the first place. Governments cannot change culture alone. I want you to know I understand that. But I can be a voice of cultural change."

G.W.Bush, May 26, 2004

When he was asked if he had made any mistakes, his reply" No, none that comes to mind." Right there everyone should have known!



We? I didn't.

Bush Honesty is an oxy-moron, He doesn't have any honesty to rate!

Keep up the great work on this. America is with you!

From what I understand, Valerie Plame was not in a position to authorize anything...she wasn't authorized to authorize. So, there's one more inaccuracy for you. This story has got so many facets to it, it makes my head spin.

quoting from article "....where Wilson previously had served. When someone was needed to travel to Niger, Plame apparently told her superiors that her husband had good contacts there. CIA officials talked with Wilson and decided he should be the one to make the trip".

From what we understand it was authorized by the CIA and Ms. Plame suggested her husband go along with others 'in the know' and came up with the same information. The documents were forgeries.

The Minneapolis Tribune should be applauded not doubt.

Came across this tonight while doing a search for war and the press -


War and the Press
Watchdogs, Lapdogs and Sleeping Dogs


Journalists like to think of themselves as watchdogs, nipping at the heels of the powerful and guarding democracy. Progressive critics see them as lapdogs for the political and corporate elite. More often reporters are just tired old dogs asleep on the porch.

Take a recent Sunday morning adventure at NBC studios in Washington, D.C., where I joined a pack of these wet dogs taking shelter from a downpour in the NBC lobby. The NBC staff wheeled out a TV cart so reporters could watch "Meet the Press" with Tim Russert. Russert interviewed Richard Perle, chairman of the Defense Policy Board (a Pentagon advisory panel charged with overseeing military preparedness), and Rep. Dennis Kucinich, the Ohio Democrat who has emerged as one of the few strong congressional voices against war.

It's a Sunday routine: At the end of the show, reporters gather outside the front door and beg the guests for a few soundbite scraps.

Until then, they sprawl out on benches in the lobby, absent-mindedly watching the interviews. This is the state of American media, the free press: reporters and camera crews watching an interview on television as it takes place just down the hall. Journalists don't like the ridiculous setup, but they don't have much choice. They have to meet the demands of the corporate media conglomerates they work for, and to do that they have to play the game.

Some read newspapers. One takes notes. Another reporter talks on a cell phone to his wife. "Yeah, they're just bickering right now No, I don't know how much longer it will be."

They listen to Perle beat the drums of war. It leads to a discussion of democracy. He says that it would be good if Israel were surrounded by democracies. He says it would be good if Iraq were a democracy.

"Democracies," Perle says to Russert, "do not engage in aggressive wars."

The dogs awake.

"What? Is this guy smoking crack?" one reporter nearly shouts. Everyone laughs and nods in agreement. The reporter expressed the frustration and outrage that millions of people around the world know, and what many journalists understand, but almost never articulate.

As I watched the interview, I wondered if Russert was also thinking, "What is he smoking?" I hoped he would say, "Well, Mr. Perle, either the laundry list of foreign aggressions in U.S. history (covert actions like those in Guatemala in 1954, proxy aggressions like in Nicaragua in the 1980s, and overt aggressions including Vietnam and Panama) are make-believe, or the United States is not a democracy. Which is it?" Russert never questioned the core of Perle's arguments: his assumptions on democracy, power, and violence. He moved on to the next topic. His silence spoke volumes.

The dogs go back to sleep.

The program ends. The reporters trudge outside and assume their positions. The first to pounce was the reporter who made the "smoking crack" comment. But she didn't pounce. She asked a generic question nearly identical to one Russert asked Perle. Perle gave a nearly identical answer. The reporters asked questions they already knew the answer to, and Perle handed them scripted answers (reporters sometimes do this so that on their broadcasts they can use their footage instead of a clip from a talkshow). Voila. News is made.

It's like a game with unwritten rules, but neither party wants to admit they're playing. Journalists are not dumb. Most of them have an idea of how the world works and how power structures operate. They are generally informed of world news. They have the ability to ask questions, like those on the minds of the millions of people who took to the streets weeks ago, yet most choose not to. They operate in a much larger system of corporate-controlled media, and must base their decisions on what they think is the best way to survive in that system.

Journalists who want to work for the national bureau of a major network know they must not only ask the right questions but also avoid asking the wrong ones. Asking hard questions could earn a reporter a reputation as a troublemaker (it once could earn the reporter a reputation as a "muckraker"). There are rewards in this system for complacency. There are few rewards for critical thinking. At that moment, I couldn't handle it. Moments earlier this reporter had seen through the lies. I wanted to grab her and yell, "YOUR COVER IS BLOWN. I know you aren't clueless. You know the truth, and you have no excuse for not speaking it."

Something had to be said, so I jumped in and asked, "Mr. Perle, you said that democracies do not engage in aggressive wars. Could you please explain, then, how you view this 'pre-emptive war,' against the will of the international community and millions of people around the world?"

I think it caught the reporters more off-guard than it did Perle. He avoided the question, and calmly said that this is not an aggressive war because Iraq has violated U.N. resolutions. He answered another reporter's question and walked away.

Next came Kucinich, and the situation repeated itself. The reporters repeated Russert's questions nearly verbatim. They were more aggressive with Kucinich, though, and I had trouble getting a question in. So, when Kucinich walked away, I followed him and asked a few questions about his vision for a Department of Peace in the federal government, which angered the other reporters.

"Why don't you come say that over here so we can all use it?" they yelled. Kucinich didn't respond. "Fine," one reporter shouted, curtly. "Goodbye to you too." We had broken the rules of the game.

The behavior of some journalists is frustrating, but it is not enough to simply blame them for acting like lazy dogs. Journalists work within larger institutions that constrain them. [For more on these constraints, check out the propaganda model presented by Ed Herman and Noam Chomsky in Manufacturing Consent or in Herman's Myth of the Liberal Media.] They can, and should, push against the constraints of those institutions, but that is only a partial solution. We need media reform movements working to change the ownership and regulation of media. [For more on this see the work of Robert McChesney and check out his new book with John Nichols, Our Media, Not Theirs.]

In a media system not dominated by corporations and money, it would be easier for journalists to do more than beg, roll over, and have their bellies rubbed. They could refuse to walk on a leash. They could bark, growl, and sometimes bite.

Will Potter is an intern for a national newspaper based in Washington, D.C. He has written for the Texas Observer, the Chicago Tribune and the Dallas Morning News. In his spare time he pays attention to politics and the state of American media. He can be reached at

Yesterday's Features

Jeffrey St. Clair
In a Land Where Justice is a Game: Killing Amos King

Anne Gwynne
Raid on Nablus: a Hero in the Midst of Horror

Nelson P. Valdés
Why Americans Can't Travel to Cuba

Jason Leopold
Martin Peretz to Bush: Bomb Iraq

Alan Maass
"A Revolutionary Spirit in a Hostile World":
The Real Martin Luther King, Jr

Jack McCarthy
Hitchens and Booze

Sonia Ebron
Why Black Americans Should Oppose Bush's War

Russell Mokiber and Robert Weissman
12 Reasons to Oppose Bush's War on Iraq

Abu Spinoza
Chomsky's Power and Terror

Website of the Day

Correction to previous post:

The Minneapolis Tribune should be applauded not doubt : was meant to be


The Minneapolis Tribune should be applauded no doubt.

Go on!

I have been a avid reader of this sight since it was up and running.

Perhaps I'm off base but, the way I see it............

DSM hurt the Whitehouse more than anything else. We are falling lock step into their trap. By keeping Rove/Plame the main topic they won't have to answer questions on the DSM. They'll keep playing this game until it's time to appoint the judges to the Supreme Court.

They are hoping by the end of all that we will have neatly forgotten about the DSM and they will go on their merry way destroying democracy.

We need to let Fitzgerald deal with Rove. And bring DSM back front and center. We can keep their feet to the fire on both but let's not get sidetracked into the slot they are trying desperately to put us.

This is an updated email list of the MSM……

Let them know what was lost here. Let them know that this administration deliberately burned a vital and irreplaceable national security asset in order to try and silence those who were exposing their lies about the need to go to war.

The list has been formatted with commas so all you have to do is cut and past into your email program.

I recommend sending them in groups so as not to jam up your server and somewhat hide the fact you are sending a mass email. There are about 15 groups below, so send the same email 15 times. It will take five minutes. (You can send directly to one and put the rest of each group in your ‘BCC’ field to hide all but two recipients)

Keep the email short.

PUT YOUR POINT IN THE SUBJECT LINE. Mine read: Karl Rove has betrayed the United States. REPORT IT!

Feel free to email the list to all your friends, co-workers, and relatives. Feel free to repost list on your favorite blog or posting forum.

You’ll get 10-20 that come back as undeliverable at any given moment.

Have fun, good luck.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Kathleen&,,,,,,,,,

I've spoken against the spamming approach in the past. I'm reconsidering. Any noise is better than no noise.

Nice list.

Now grease me up with some of that MSM

Betty, your finger is right on the button. That is exactly what they are doing. Rove is the diversion - the harder they push Rove et al on the scene, the more we will see just HOW worried they are.

Let's get back on track to DSM and watch the show!

I respectfully disagree with both of you. That's like saying we're all too preoccupied with DSM to have any attention span left for the impending Supreme Court confirmation(s). I don't doubt that the Bush admin hope this issue will take our eyes off the prize but there is no chance that will happen. People are slowly awakening; the mooing that has emanated too long from journalists is finally abating. I don't think the half million people who signed Rep. Conyers's petition are going to simply forget about the DSM because a smaller prize appears imminent.

This is not a choice between pursuing Bush over DSM or Valerie Plame. We now have ample manpower to dog them on both fronts. The ongoing revelations about Geneva Convention violations in Iraq and Guantanamo Bay have them on their heels as well. Before you know it they will be too busy with damage control on so many fronts to ever go back on offense but it's up to us to keep up the pressure on every front and not put all our eggs in one basket by focusing on one pet cause to the detriment of all others. We have too much momentum now to settle for false choices.

I'm not asking you to agree or disagree with me. Just take a look at this website...............

We are now discussing Rove more than the DSM. And I said in my earlier post, we can keep their feet to the fire on both issues but, lets not lose sight of the DSM.

While we have reporters asking the tough questions on Rove they should be following it up with the tough questions on DSM. We can't give them any slack in that department. We have the momentum with the reporters lets keep it going.

The less a question is answered the more it is asked. That is how they are keeping Rove in the spotlight and shoving DSM to the background. Wake up folks get back to DSM number one and Rove number two. (As I wrote Rove number two............well I'll let you finish my thoughts in your own creative way.)

I don't think focusing on Rove is a bad thing. I think it ultimately leads to the DSM, and the lies the Bush administration used to go to war. I look at it like peeling an onion, and Rove is the first layer. Right now a lot of people that have never heard of the DSM have just been awakened to it via the Rove hoopla (inculding some people I know). That is a good thing. The DSM is not going away, and I think by keeping the Rove controversy in front of the American public the many people just waking up to all of this will start ask themselves questions like "why was it so important for Rove to cover this up?", or "gee, doesn't this mean that the Bush administration knew that the very claims they were using on the American public to go to war were false?", and so on. To me, the more that the Rove story stays out there, and the more that Bush stands by his brain, the more people will begin to wonder why Bush hasn't fired Rove, which leads to what Bush fears about Rove, and what Bush knows, and what Bush is covering up, which will lead to the build up to war, and the DSM will then be the crux for impeachment. Just my 2 cents.

Agreed that the DSM is more important than Rove, however, I think you’re missing the boat in seeing this as a ploy. Rove knows too much to be thrown overboard. The fight will considerably weaken the neocons and will embolden the press (that’s the best part of this) and the Democrats. Many Republicans may also see it as a chance to jump ship before the thing sinks. When indictments come out, one of them may well have Dick Cheney’s name on it-battle over.

Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth.

suppose she decides to talk. Have a hunch she would say a lot.

This is not a fight the administration wants, or can win.

CBS news correspondent Jim Forest reported that Miller said"I won't testify. The risks are too great,the government is too powerful". Does she have information about a top official that is making her hide in the protection of the system? It may not have anything to do with ethics but everything to do with fear.

However, people change their minds regularly-it'll happen about a billion times today. She's lurking out there, and the white house knows it.


Exactly, diversion is their only weapon, well sort of. These killers are without remorse, it is their credo.

I don't care if we all dance in the rain if Rove goes out on a stretcher, I'm all for that. But let's not forget Iraq, bin Laden, The House of Saud, etc.

I am fraid one is prone to take one's eye off the proverbial ball, as it were, when one has "one" in hand.. versus one in yer average bush.

I would not be so concerned, but at this time and place, we have to be able to carry around more than one thought at a time.

It's lying to Congress ... That at about says it all. I think the Republicans are trying rationalize Bush's behavior. "Fixing intelligence around a policy" they say is simply "maneuvering room" and that these were not lies, they weren't even mistakes.

If you look at each lie, there's only a little guilt assigned to each one. Goerge has lied, yes, but a lot of little lies, too, they assert AND the Repub wingnuts also state emphatically that "guilt" (according to Dr. Freud) is not additive. One can average over each guilt, they said, but, since 'guilt' is a stock and not a flow you can't add it up.

One might quake in ones boots; however, we now have Quantum Mecahanics/Physics/States! guilt is not only a stock but also a flow.... it depends on how one looks at it!

Reminding George of his known mendacity; over and over again!

So, George's little guilt attached to each little lie becomes additive and the guilt just wraps little George up in a Gordian knot and he can no longer function as your President.

I know that's not the outcome most of you are expecting... I wouldn't mind seing the one I just described play out, though. It would have my attention!

Rove is only the tip of a dirty iceberg. The bigger picture includes this:

The McCain-Feingold legislation overlooked one form of political campaign contribution. No wonder – who in their right mind would have thought that soldiers, human sacrifices in a politically motivated war, would become unwitting campaign donors?

Leading up to the 2000 presidential campaign, George W. Bush vowed he wouldn’t repeat his father’s error. In effect, said Bush, if I ever accumulate the huge political capital that comes from leading the nation in war, I won’t waste it; I’m going to use it.

Prior to 9/11, George W. Bush’s popularity had already fallen so low in polls, his re-election looked questionable without a miracle. 9/11 was no miracle, but Bush gained unprecedented popularity in the polls. Most Americans rallied around the president.

For a while, Bush popularity stayed high. But Bush’s control of the Senate slipped away when Republican Senator Jeffords became an Independent. Bush was unable to stop (or even postpone beyond Nov 2002 mid-term congressional elections)calls for investigation of 9/11 . Bush political allies feared his popularity might not hold up well enough to ensure a Republican congressional landslide. The historically usual midterm gains by the opposition might further derail Bush’s agenda.

Something else was needed. That “something else

I have visited this site almost daily since I first heard of "The Memo." We must persist as a general public...many just need to hear to merely see this crime for what it is. Many cling to time worn and family created images of a gentle and truthful political machine. For those of us such as myself, there is just a general concern for all human beings...American, British, Italian, Papua New Guinean, IRAQI!!! I emailed Pete King (with two embarassing typos upon reread...) However, I felt it my duty as a severely disappointed citizen to follow up at every opportunity. I copied the listed addresses and sent this email: (Keep up the great work)

"Come on journalists...It is almost three months now. The general public knows the case for war was and continues to be a lie...if you would just follow up PUBLICLY on the Downing Street Memo you could be could help restore an image of democracy to the world as well as show the troops there is a hope in their future. Rove is being investigated and will surely be exposed...but WAKE UP!!!! The Downing Street Memo is a gold mine. The Downing Street Memo distinctly states George Bush manufactured an illegal and blatantly deceptive case for a pre-emptive war. As an American citizen I plead for this coverage. My very fingertips are shaking as I ponder the crime of a media so belligerently unaccountable.

Let us not allow the potential unravelling of the biggest mistake of your professional careers. Let us not look back on these days years from now and wonder why we did so little when so many obvious corrupt ploys were waiting behind the onobtrusive political screen doors in the wretched form of a disguised self-indulgent deceit.

Is truth not sacred! Is human life not sacred! Help bring the truth to face about these god awful lies and political debauchery! Expose the Downing Street Memo because it is your professional obligation.

With utmost respect and expectancy,

Joseph Zarr
Minneapolis, MN
American citizen
Concerned Homo sapien for all of planet earth"

Great job ALL who keep the pressure on. FINALLY, the MSM is ALL OVER THIS STORY; which IS a great outgrowth of DSM; for those of you who didnt see the John Conyers hearing WITH WILSON & BONIFAZ aired on C-SPAN. The "leak" was brought up by Wilson in discussion at the DSM
hearing...and thanks to Conyers, Bonifaz, Wilson and all the courageous people willing to speak out...more than DOTS are being connected now...the BLOODY TAPESTRY may actually be on display for
ALL to see and experience. There are still people who believe Fox is fair and balanced, as there are those who dont own a computer much less know how to turn one on...but EVEN FOX is covering the Rove thing...AND finally Bush spoke and said this is a serious investigation without supporting Rove. I do wish I was a fly on the wall in the Chief Prosecutors office...but I am hopeful that this
investigation will provide ALL the News re: the covert illegal operations in the WH. Hang in there...tell friends, keep the pressure on...demand the truth from the media, written and spoken, and let your representatives know We the People deserve nothing less than the truth.

Interesting there is nothing being said about Rove on the couple of sights I looked at.

I need to look for more sishts but they are not talking!

This could be telling. There are several persistent hecklers on this sight-tells me they're worried.

they know they got screwed again ...this time Worse than Watergate

It is so sad that we are astounded that Fox news is giving coverage to this issue. We should be outraged that DSM and any other issue of this importance would not be reported by the media. I am appaled by this irresponsible media.If this is somehow put on the shelf,which I can't imagine,then it is time to boycott news advertisers!

Washington, D.C.(See link below) certainly would draw a lot of media attention !

This is our chance to make a statement, to force change, to make this administration sweat, to refuse to be ignored. This adminisration has shown us (The American People) nothing but "hubris" for five years now. Let us all join together and march on to the Whitehouse "En Masse" in September. Benedict Rove called us cowards, lets show him how wrong he was.

Stop watching the MSM now. They dont deserve the public trust. There are enough alternative news outlets on the internet, and there is c-span on tv. That is probably the best way to get the attention of a crooked, asleep at the wheel news media. Once we have their attention, we demand reform.... Short of any reform, we don't need the MSM anymore, and in fact they are detrimental to our society. I have stopped looking to the MSM for over a year now.....

If you boycott the MSM then only people who don't care about this stuff will be watching the MSM. We need as many people watching and rewarding the shows that step up and start pounding this stuff making it worth while for them to keep doing so. If you jump ship you will be left with nothing but Right Wing shows pounding the casual viewers with only one side of the issue, If we jump on board and yell kick and scream about what is and isn't being covered, you will see progressive shows starting to pop up more and more...which in the end is the only way to stop the direction we are going...

I disagree with all those who suggest the media attention on Rove is distracting from the Downing Street Memos. Conversely Plamegate, as several editorials and NPR have stressed, leads directly to the "intelligence is being fixed around the policy" quote from the DSM. Everytime a story is run about Plamegate, Rove's possible motive for his treacherous actions also comes up. Millions of Americans are thus starting to wake up to the fact that this is part of a larger strategy to con them and Congress into war.

If he actually is indicted for something (even charged for perjury), attention to the DSM will ramp-up considerably and the whole stinking house of cards could start to tumble down on Bush and co. One lie leads to another. Keep your fingers crossed

Couldn't agree more.

The media is starting awaken.
Who is Fredrick Fleitz?

Hear! Hear!

Damn straight!

Great article.

For those of you who accept that, Team-Bush used phoney reasons when making the case for war, I have one question.

What Team-Bush's actual reasons for war?

Help me out here - I need to know!

Oil (for the obvious reasons), Israel's lobbying (for our American kids to be their guard-dogs), and Logistical American Bases in the Mid-East(so Bush & Company can rule the world Pax Americana style, AKA the military-industrial complex).

Follow the money trail. look into the 8.8 billion that "disappeared" under Bremer's watch.check into the halliburton/KBR no-bid contracts.take a look at the oil industry's involvement on all levels. this is just a beginning....

Comment viewing options

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


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Julie Varughese


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



Find the perfect Purple Bridesmaid Dresses for your bridesmaids from




Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on

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.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.