Why does any American think that spying without a warrant has
any more effect in reducing the threat of terrorism than spying
with a warrant? The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which
Bush is disobeying, requires the executive to obtain from a
secret panel of federal judges a warrant for spying on
Americans. The purpose of the law is to prevent a president from
spying for partisan political reasons. The law permits the
president to spy first (for 72 hours) and then come to the court
for permission. As the court meets in secret, spying without a
warrant is no more effective in reducing the threat of terrorism
than spying with a warrant.
Instead of explaining this basic truth, the media have played
along with the Bush administration and formulated the question
as a trade-off between civil liberties and protection from
terrorists. This formulation is false and nonsensical. Why do
the media enable the Bush administration to escape
accountability for illegal behavior by putting false and
misleading choices before the people?
The LA Times-Bloomberg poll has equally striking anomalies. Only
43 percent said they approved of Bush's performance as
president. But a majority believes Bush's policies have made the
United States more secure.
It is extraordinary that anyone would think Americans are safer
as a result of Bush invading two Muslim countries and constantly
threatening two more with military attack. The invasions and
threats have caused a dramatic swing in Muslim sentiment away
from the United States. Prior to Bush's invasion of Iraq, a
large majority of Muslims had a favorable opinion of America.
Now, only about 5 percent do.
A number of U.S. commanders in Iraq and many Middle East experts
have told the American public that the three-year-old war in
Iraq is serving both to recruit and to train terrorists for
Al-Qaeda, which has grown many times its former size. Moreover,
the U.S. military has concluded that Al-Qaeda has succeeded in
having its members elected to the new Iraqi government.
We have seen similar developments both in Egypt and in Pakistan.
In the recent Egyptian elections, the radical Muslim
Brotherhood, despite being suppressed by the Egyptian
government, won a large number of seats. In Pakistan, elements
friendly or neutral toward Al-Qaeda control about half of the
government. In Iraq, Bush's invasion has replaced secular Sunnis
with Islamist Shia allied with Iran.
And now with the triumph of Hamas in the Palestinian election,
we see the total failure of Bush's Middle Eastern policy. Bush
has succeeded in displacing secular moderates from Middle
Eastern governments and replacing them with Islamic extremists.
It boggles the mind that this disastrous result makes Americans
feel safer!
What does it say for democracy that half of the American
population is unable to draw a rational conclusion from
unambiguous facts?
Americans share this disability with the Bush administration.
According to news reports, the Bush administration is stunned by
the election victory of the radical Islamist Hamas Party, which
swept the U.S.-financed Fatah Party from office. Why is the Bush
administration astonished?
The Bush administration is astonished because it stupidly
believes that hundreds of millions of Muslims should be grateful
that the United States has interfered in their internal affairs
for 60 years, setting up colonies and puppet rulers to suppress
their aspirations and to achieve, instead, purposes of the U.S.
government.
Americans need desperately to understand that 95 percent of all
Muslim terrorists in the world were created in the past three
years by Bush's invasion of Iraq.
Americans need desperately to comprehend that if Bush attacks
Iran and Syria, as he intends, terrorism will explode, and
American civil liberties will disappear into a 30-year war that
will bankrupt the United States.
The total lack of rationality and competence in the White House
and the inability of half of the U.S. population to acquire and
understand information are far larger threats to Americans than
terrorism.
America has become a rogue nation, flying blind, guided only by
ignorance and hubris. A terrible catastrophe awaits.
----------------------------------------------------
Rumsfeld Wants a Ministry of Truth
by Paul Craig Roberts
When deceit catches up with a government, officials take refuge
in propaganda. Thus, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld told the
Washington Times (Oct. 24) that he wants a "21st century
information agency in the government" to help fight a "war of
ideas" and educate Americans and foreigners that Big Brother is
right.
Last year Rumsfeld was forced to close a clandestine "Office of
Strategic Influence" in the Pentagon when reports surfaced that
the Pentagon was issuing false information abroad in order to
influence public sentiment and policy in other countries.
Rumsfeld wants to revive this office and to include the US under
its sway.
The flower-strewn "cakewalk" promised by Rumsfeld has become,
according to his leaked private Pentagon memo, the "long, hard
slog." The claims made by Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, and
Wolfowitz to justify the invasion of Iraq were not correct, and
our intelligence agencies knew the claims were not correct.
Senior Republican senators are calling for Bush "to take charge
of his government." Harper’s publisher John R. MacArthur has
called publicly for Bush to be impeached.
These developments do not serve the neo-Jacobin (neocon) agenda
of wider war in the Middle East. In order to regain control of
the agenda, the warmongers intend to create a Ministry of
Propaganda so that they can control the facts.
The silence of the public and the meekness of the press in the
face of unprecedented lies from the US government has opened the
door for a Ministry of Truth.
Rumsfeld regards the public’s acceptance of a war based on lies
as the public’s complicity in the deed. He reckons that the
flag-waving public, as much as the government, will welcome a
new ministry to control the facts.
A Ministry of Truth has many advantages. No one ever has to say
they are sorry, admit they were wrong, or learn they were
suckered. Political remorse and heartburn become forgotten
words. Casualties, like the wounded, will disappear from the
news. We will be safe from emotional discomfort until we do
something that arouses the government’s suspicion.
Recently, Rumsfeld’s former ally, AEI warmonger Tom Donnelly,
lambasted the Defense Secretary for "mulish opposition to
increasing the number of American soldiers in Iraq." In his
article in the Weekly Standard, Donnelly doesn't’t say where the
American soldiers are to come from, but the obvious implication
is the draft, which awaits Bush’s second term.
In Jacobin ideology people don’t count. Only abstract virtues
are important, and neocons unabashedly claim to act for these
virtues. Neocons are outraged that they are denied the manpower
to impose virtue on the world. Today Iraq. Tomorrow the world.
A Ministry of Truth could justify the draft and silence all
opposition as unpatriotic or anti-semitic, two words that are
becoming interchangeable.
In the now infamous leaked memo, Rumsfeld writes, "we have not
yet made truly bold moves." This is scary. Surely it is bold to
use lies and fabrications to start a needless war and to invade
a country despite being totally unprepared for the consequences
of the invasion. Indeed, reckless seems the more appropriate
description.
Prior to the US invasion of Iraq, Americans had the world’s
sympathy. Today the US is viewed throughout the world as a
dangerous rogue state. Syndicated columnist Doug Bandow reports
that hatred of Americans is now so high that it is risky for
Americans to travel abroad, especially to countries with Muslim
populations.
A Ministry of Truth would save us from the shame any decent
person feels when he reads that American soldiers have destroyed
the orchards – the only means of livelihood – of poor Iraqi
villages, because villagers don’t make themselves terrorist
targets by ratting on guerillas. A Ministry of Truth would
protect us from the knowledge that frustrated US soldiers use
tanks to flatten taxis whose owners are suspected of withholding
information.
With a Ministry of Truth we wouldn't’t have to hear that the US
holds hostage the womenfolk of wanted Iraqis, or that US
"helicopters swooped down on this remote sheepherding village in
the desert and detained all the men . . . to punish the village
because of suspicions it maintains contact with desert smugglers
or infiltrators from across the border."
Instead, we would hear the reassuring news that "we are bringing
democracy to Iraq."
-----------------------------------------
George W. Bush will go down in history as the president who
fiddled while America lost its superpower status.
Bush used deceit and hysteria to lead America into a war that is
bleeding the United States economically, militarily and
diplomatically. The war is being fought with hundreds of
billions of dollars borrowed from foreigners. The war is
bleeding the military of troops and commitments. The war has
ended the U.S. claim to moral leadership and exposed the United
States as a reckless and aggressive power.
Focused on a concocted "war on terrorism," the Bush
administration diverted money from the New Orleans levees to
Iraq, with the consequence that the United States now has a $100
billion rebuild bill on top of the war bill.
The United States is so short of troops that neo conservatives
are advocating the use of foreign mercenaries paid with U.S.
citizenship. U.S. efforts to isolate Iran have been blocked by
Russia and China, nuclear powers that Bush cannot bully.
The Iraqi war has three beneficiaries: Al-Qaeda, Iran, and U.S.
war industries and Bush-Cheney cronies who receive no-bid
contracts. Everyone else is a loser.
The war has bestowed on Al-Qaeda recruits, prestige and a
training ground.
The war has allied Iran with Iraq's Shi'ite majority. The war
has brought soaring profits to the military industries and the
firms with reconstruction contracts at the expense of 20,000
U.S. military casualties and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian
casualties. The Republican Party is a loser, because its
hidebound support for the war is isolating the party from public
opinion.
The Democratic Party is a loser, because its cowardly
acquiescence in a war that is opposed by the majority of its
members is making the party irrelevant.
The latest polls show that a majority of Americans believe the
United States cannot win against the Iraq insurgency. The
majority supports withdrawal and the redirection of war spending
to rebuilding New Orleans. Despite the clarity of the public's
wishes, the Republican Party continues to support the unpopular
war.
With the exceptions of Reps. Cynthia McKinney and John Conyers,
Democrats fled the scene of the Sept. 24 antiwar rally in
Washington, D.C. The cynical Democrats are apparently owned by
the same interest groups that own the Republicans and are
refusing the mantle of majority party that the electorate is
offering to the party that will end the war.
The Bush administration is churning out red ink in excess of $1
trillion annually. The federal budget deficit is approaching
$500 billion. The U.S. trade deficit is approaching $700
billion. The budget deficit is being financed by foreigners,
primarily Asians who now hold enough U.S. government debt to
exercise power over U.S. interest rates and the value of the
dollar whenever they decide to use the power that Bush has
placed in their hands.
The trade deficit is being financed by turning over the
ownership of U.S. assets and future income streams to
foreigners, making Americans forever poorer from the loss of
accumulated wealth.
For the time being, China is willing to accumulate U.S. assets
as a way of taking over our consumer markets, attracting U.S.
manufacturing industry with cheap labor subsidized by artificial
currency values, and gaining our technology. China's strategy is
to overvalue the U.S. dollar in order to encourage the transfer
of U.S. economic capabilities to China. China's strategy gives
artificial value to the dollar and keeps U.S. interest rates at
an artificial low.
The values of U.S. stocks, bonds and real estate depend on the
support that Asians' economic strategies provide the dollar and
U.S. interest rates. As Asia achieves its goal of pre-eminence
in manufacturing, innovation and product development, the
strategy will change. Once China completes its acquisition of
U.S. capabilities, it will no longer have a reason to support
the dollar.
When the dollar goes, it will affect costs, profits, interest
rates and living standards in dramatic ways. Costs and interest
rates will soar, and profits, living standards, equity values,
bond prices and real estate will plummet.
These unpleasant events await only Asia's decision to curtail
its support for U.S. red ink. That will happen when this support
no longer serves Asia's interest.
When Asia pulls the plug on the dollar, the U.S. government will
find that monetary and fiscal policy are powerless to offset the
consequences.
Compared to U.S. budget and trade deficits, terrorists are a
minor concern. The greatest danger that the United States faces
is the dollar's loss of reserve currency role. This would be an
impoverishing event, one from which the United States would not
recover.
An intelligent government sincerely concerned with homeland
security would find a way to halt the global labor arbitrage
that is stripping the American economy of high value-added jobs
and manufacturing capability, thereby causing the U.S. trade
deficit to explode. The loss of tax base that results when U.S.
companies outsource jobs and relocate production abroad makes it
ever more difficult to balance a budget strained by war, natural
disasters, and demographic impact on Social Security and
Medicare.
Global labor arbitrage is rapidly dismantling the ladders of
upward mobility and thereby endangering American political
stability. This threat is far greater than any Osama bin Laden
can mount.
Time is running out for Republicans and Democrats to escape from
the distraction of a pointless war and to focus on the real
threats that endanger the United States of America.