Time to be afraid - Be very afraid.

[thebullet]

Paranoia Grips the U.S. Capital
By Eric Margolis
The Toronto Sun

Sunday 06 February 2005

The film Seven Days In May is one of my all-time favourites. The gripping 1964 drama, starring Burt Lancaster, depicts an attempted coup by far rightists in Washington using a top-secret Pentagon anti-terrorist unit called something like "Contelinpro."

Life imitates art. This week, former military intelligence analyst William Arkin revealed a hitherto unknown directive, with the Orwellian name "JCS Conplan 0300-97," authorizing the Pentagon to employ special, ultra-secret "anti-terrorist" military units on American soil for what the author claims are "extra-legal missions."

In other words, using U.S. soldiers to kill or arrest Americans, acts that have been illegal since the U.S. Civil War.

This frightening news comes as Washington is gripped by reborn, Cold-War-style paranoia, ominous threats of war against Iran from the real president, Dick Cheney, and a titanic bureaucratic battle just won by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Instead of being fired for the grotesque military-political fiasco in Iraq and the shameful torture scandals, Rumsfeld has just managed to create a new, Pentagon spy/special ops organization, blandly named "Strategic Support Branch," that will replace or duplicate many of the CIA's tasks.

The CIA has been sent to the doghouse. Too many CIA veterans criticized or contradicted Bush's and Cheney's phony claims over Iraq and terrorism. So Bush has imposed a new, yes-man director on the agency, slashed its budgets, purged its senior officers, and downgraded CIA to third-class status.

Rumsfeld's new, massively funded SSB will become the Pentagon's CIA, complete with commando units, spies, mercenary forces, intelligence gathering and analysis, and a direct line to the White House. The Pentagon has just effectively taken over the spy business.

Used Terrorism Hysteria

Mind you, the Pentagon and its Defence Intelligence Agency have been deeply involved in intelligence around the globe for 50 years. U.S. Army intelligence a nd its covert sub-branches have long conducted "black ops," including missions in the U.S. as well as assassinations and sabotage abroad. The Pentagon consumes three-quarters of the total U.S. intelligence budget.

Rumsfeld has skillfully used terrorism hysteria to wrest control of intelligence and make the Pentagon supreme in Washington's bureaucratic power struggles.

The Pentagon's new spy arm will be largely excluded from Congressional oversight or media examination. Its special operations teams will roam the globe, all under cover of "deep black" missions of which no records will be kept, and no questions asked.

Equally worrying, the Pentagon's new special-ops units are headed up by notorious religious fanatic, Lt. Gen. William Boykin, who calls the U.S. Army "the house of God" and Islamic insurgents "agents of Satan." He warned Muslims, "my God is bigger than your god, which is an idol."

Boykin's command will now dispatch post-modern Christian crusaders to cleanse the world of Satanic Muslims and other miscreants. The Pentagon's new special forces will be able to run operations of which the CIA knows nothing.

The 9/11 Commission called for improved intra-agency co-operation and data sharing -- instead, the U.S. will get far less co-operation, as the Pentagon goes its own, secret way.

Now, George W. Bush, who clearly believes he holds the mandate of heaven after being re-elected by the less mentally active half of American voters, has decided to "unleash" special forces and all sorts of irregular units, including mercenaries, uniformed bounty hunters, and mutants sporting t-shirts
proclaiming "kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out." These militarized thugs and video arcade Rambos are sure to run amok, dragging America's once good name ever deeper into the mud.

We have evidently learned nothing from the wars in Indochina and Central America.

Have we reached Seven Days in May?

Not yet, but the second Bush administration has been taking dangerous steps that continue to curtail personal rights, further emasculate the supine, cowardly U.S. Congress, and empower ideological or religious extremists and shadowy agencies with
unrestrained powers that endanger Americans at home, and all abroad suspected of troubling the Pax Americana.

 

[Guest]

U.S. intelligence

?????

 

[thebullet]

CV:
Are you implying that "US Intelligence" is an oxymoron? We resemble that remark!

 

[Somme]

someone casting nasturtiums, eh?

 

[rgraham666]

Mr. Margolis illustrates how skewed our perceptions and society have become.

A decade ago he was a 'conservative' columnist. I used to read him because although I rarely agreed with him, his writing was trenchant and perceptive. I always knew that despite our philosophical differences we were not enemies. We both had the survival and improvement of our society in mind.

That attitude has now made him one of the most consistent and penetrating opponents of the Shrub administration.

How far has the pendulum swung that a person like him is opposed to it?

 

[thebullet]

rgraham wrote:
How far has the pendulum swung that a person like him is opposed to it?

What I don't understand is why American Conservatives have fallen into this fascist trap. When a conservative columnist in Canada considers the Bush administration to be a bunch of kooks, why can't American conservatives see the same thing?

We have good, logical people on this very website defending the Bush administration as if they actually deserve to be defended. Meanwhile this government is working to undermine everything that America once stood for.

Let me shout this just once more:
THE EMPORER HAS NO CLOTHES!!!

 

[rgraham666]

The Shrubbies are not conservatives but revolutionaries. The conservative poilitical philosophy had the two factors that made it easy for the revolutionaries to hijack. It had power and it was corrupt enough to be easily mislead.

If America was 'left' leaning enough, the revolutionaries would have used that as they did in Czarist Russia.

In their soul, revolutionaries only care about 'truth' and power.

 

[Guest]

CV:
Are you implying that "US Intelligence" is an oxymoron? We resemble that remark!

3/4

 

[shereads]

Mr. Margolis illustrates how skewed our perceptions and society have become.

A decade ago he was a 'conservative' columnist. I used to read him because although I rarely agreed with him, his writing was trenchant and perceptive. I always knew that despite our philosophical differences we were not enemies. We both had the survival and improvement of our society in mind.

That attitude has now made him one of the most consistent and penetrating opponents of the Shrub administration.

How far has the pendulum swung that a person like him is opposed to it?

Far enough that Hunter S. Thompson is nostalgic for the Nixon administration, and rightly notes that if Nixon had competed for the Republican nomination in 2004 he'd have been branded a liberal.

 

[shereads]

For those who aren't too weary of it all, here's the leftist answer to Project for the New American Century. Some of the articles are just credible enough to prove that being paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get us.

If you're rather not read more grim news or commentary, the site has some fun graphics to rip off (my Halliburton AV):

Project for the Old American Century:

http://www.oldamericancentury.org/

 

[shereads]

For me, the worst thing about the last four years (and the influence of the Ken Starr faction on the previous six) is that it's no longer possible to dismiss out of hand any claim of wrongdoing by my government.

A nauseating case in point is this story that I first heard mentioned on Chris Matthews' show at MSNBC, which isn't exactly a hotbed of liberalism. Here it is again, by coincidence, at Project for the Old American Century.

February 04, 2005
CNN News Head Says US Miltary Targets Journalists
Jordan Story Explodes

CNN was scrambling to contact Davos blogger Rony Abovitz the moment he got off his airplane from Switzerland. Now we know why. Hugh Hewitt has had an email exchange with Abovitz that blows the lid off the story. There can be little doubt that Eason Jordan, the head news guy at CNN, did accuse American soldiers of deliberately murdering journalists in Iraq. Here are portions of the email exchange, as reported by Hugh:
_ _
HH: Can you describe the makeup of the crowd?
_ _
RA: At least one U.S. Senator (Dodd), journalists from the major media (Fortune, Wall Street Journal), a number of dignitaries and journalists from Middle Eastern countries, scientists, professors, corporate CEO's and senior executives....it was a a good mix of the powerful and influential people who essentially run the world.
_ _
HH: Was the session videotaped?
_ _
RA: I saw a cameraman operating a camera throughout the session filming everything. Unless he was just there going through the motions, it was taped.
_ _
HH: Did Mr. Jordan make his "targeted" remark in response to a comment by Congressman Frank?
_ _
RA: I believe that Congressman Frank was dragged into all of this after the fact. Mr. Jordan gave us all a monologue that evolved from his personal experiences in Iraq about this idea of U.S. soldiers targeting U.S. and foreign journalists. I first challenged Mr. Jordan, and then moderator David Gergen (of Harvard's JFK School of Government) brought Frank in as a member of the U.S. government to respond to claims that shocked all of us. I remember Gergen in particular being flabbergasted and disturbed to a very high degree by Mr. Jordan's statements. Congressman Frank told the audience that his briefings indicated that all the journalists killed to date in Iraq were due to "collateral damage". Jordan disagreed, and gave us an example of U.S. soldiers deliberately shelling a hotel in Iraq which was known to all as a haven for journalists covering both sides of the war. Congressman Frank was pretty much a bystander being dragged into all of it.
_ _
HH: Can you recall the reaction of the audience to the initial Jordan statement concerning "targeting?"
_ _
RA: Some members of the audience were shocked and in disbelief. Others supported Mr. Jordan's statements and seemed visibly impressed that Mr. Jordan had the courage to say such things to a world audience. One thing I will never forget: Arab journalists coming up to Mr. Jordan at the end of the session and praising his sheer bravery for standing up to the U.S. military in such a public way. I will also never forget the absolute look of horror on Professor Gergen's face, the disbelief that the U.S. military would ever do such things. Gergen went on to describe that in his own experience, the U.S. military were always the "good guys", rescuing journalists, never deliberately targeting them for death. Gergen also felt obligated to basically halt the debate at some point because the Pentagon and U.S. military were not represented at the session, and therefore no balanced discussion could be had (Congressman Frank is probably not a good proxy for the Pentagon). Another observation: those of us from the U.S. in the crowd were by and large disturbed, but it seemed that those from Europe or the Middle East were in large agreement with Mr. Jordan, as if he was confirming what they already new and believed. The divide between the U.S. and the rest of the world seemed large. I do want to note that the topic seemed to be an emotional one for Mr. Jordan, and I believe that he has had friends and co-workers who were journalists killed in Iraq. He seemed so moved and passionate about the subject that it only compounded the level of uncertainty and severity about what was being discussed. A number of people in the audience, including Senator Dodd, came up to me and thanked me for directly challenging what was a serious charge against the U.S. military. I wonder why Senator Dodd didn't take Mr. Jordan on himself right then and there. A lot of us were disturbed by the possibility of Mr. Jordan's statements being true, and at the same time equally disturbed by the lack of hard data, or any data, to back up what he said.
_ _
The contrast of what he was saying before and after he realized what he was saying was pretty incredible. His media savvy, professional executive brain did kick in, but not soon enough. The content and context of what he said would allow groups with an anti-American bias to take what he said and believe that the American military forces had targeted for assasination journalists. For someone with a pro-U.S. posture, you were left confused and in disbelief. It was easy and even credible to believe (in the WEF setting, post Abu Ghraib Prison scandal) that the U.S. military was capable of doing anything. A good answer to this question can come from someone like Afghan foreign minister, Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, who also shared the stage with Mr. Jordan. I would also encourage you to get responses to this question from a wide spectrum of Arab journalists. Understanding how they understood Mr. Jordan's message could be helpful.
Jordan appears to be more or less in hiding. Where is the videotape?
What this story shows, I think, is how badly the left-wing media have damaged the United States with their incessant accusations and over-the-top coverage of stories like Abu Ghraib.

UPDATE: Meanwhile, a female Italian journalist has been kidnapped by a gang of gunmen in Baghdad. Somehow, though, it doesn't seem to occur to anyone that U.S. soldiers could be responsible.

FURTHER UPDATE: I have phoned Barney Frank, emailed David Gergen, and phoned CNN to ask Frank, Gergen and Jordan for interviews. I'm not holding my breath, but you never know. Actually, it would be smart for Eason Jordan to give us an interview. It would be a great way to get his side of the story out in the venue where the story is being debated, that is, the blogosphere. We'll see whether CNN agrees.

 

[Guest]

Journalists must be silenced!!!

 

[thebullet]

C V Said:
Journalists must be silenced!!!

Hey, CV, inside the USA the journalists don't need to be silenced. Most are already loyally touting the party line. What the government doesn't want reported is any stories of deaths or gore or things that might make the great unwashed masses uncomfortable. We mustn't muddy the waters with facts!

 

[EarthquakeMan]

For me, the worst thing about the last four years (and the influence of the Ken Starr faction on the previous six) is that it's no longer possible to dismiss out of hand any claim of wrongdoing by my government.

Wrongdoing? The righteous can do no wrong. It's in the rules.

 

[shereads]

Let me shout this just once more:
THE EMPORER HAS NO CLOTHES!!!

It's worse than that.
The clothes have no emperor.

 

[SeaCat]

Bullet,

I haven't heard this before and would need to see a lot more information before I could even start to form an opinion on it. Not only does it seem far fetched, it is very close to the plot of a book I am reading right now. (Fiction of course, and written by an ex Marine Colonel.)

Cat

 

[thebullet]

Sea Cat said:
Not only does it seem far fetched, it is very close to the plot of a book I am reading right now. (Fiction of course, and written by an ex Marine Colonel.)

Sea Cat: Perhaps you also read Five Days of the Condor (made into a move called "Three Days of the Condor"). One of the plot devices in that story was that books were published which passed information about CIA plots and plans or games.

No offense intended to our fine men in the Marine corp., but any writer will tell you that at first you write about something you know. Is it possible that the Colonel in question was writing from experience or based upon rumors he heard in the corridors of the Pentagon?

As for seeming far fetched to you: I suggest you watch what is happening in Washington. The scenarios going on now could not have been imagined four years ago. Far fetched is the least of it.

Sea Cat: you cannot get good information through the normal American news media. The neo-cons control most major outlets in one way or another. If you want to get a bit of truth with your news, I suggest you try BBC World News. Or read papers from outside the United States that aren't being pressured by the American government. (Such as the Toronoto Sun).

Don't you think it would be wise at the very least to get a second opinion????

To most of the world, Americans appear to be complete idiots, being lead around by the nose with cajolery, lies and threats.

But again, that might appear to be a bit far fetched to you.

 

[SeaCat]

Sea Cat: Perhaps you also read Five Days of the Condor (made into a move called "Three Days of the Condor"). One of the plot devices in that story was that books were published which passed information about CIA plots and plans or games.

No offense intended to our fine men in the Marine corp., but any writer will tell you that at first you write about something you know. Is it possible that the Colonel in question was writing from experience or based upon rumors he heard in the corridors of the Pentagon?

As for seeming far fetched to you: I suggest you watch what is happening in Washington. The scenarios going on now could not have been imagined four years ago. Far fetched is the least of it.

Sea Cat: you cannot get good information through the normal American news media. The neo-cons control most major outlets in one way or another. If you want to get a bit of truth with your news, I suggest you try BBC World News. Or read papers from outside the United States that aren't being pressured by the American government. (Such as the Toronoto Sun).

Don't you think it would be wise at the very least to get a second opinion????

To most of the world, Americans appear to be complete idiots, being lead around by the nose with cajolery, lies and threats.

But again, that might appear to be a bit far fetched to you.

Bullet,

You say {quote)" Don't you think it would be wise at the very least to get a second opinion????" (quote)
Isn't that what I was saying? That I needed to see a lot more information on this before I formed an opinion?

Now as for your slight verbal attack on me, stop and think for a minute. Many times I have written in support of your posts. Once in a while I have asked for a bit more information, or advised you to get some more information, but never have I, (even when I disagreed with you,) verbally attacked you. As a matter of fact your reply sounded much like those replies Amicus gives you upon occasion, to which you get so very upset. Rethink your strategy.

Now as for my reading lists, yes they include the local papers for where I live, as well as several in New England. They also include CNN, BBC, several German Papers and a couple of other foreign papers.

Think before you assume.

Cat