Cheney Attempting to Constrain Bush’s Choices on Iran Conflict: Staff Engaged in Insubordination Against President Bush

-

cheney200.jpg
There is a race currently underway between different flanks of the administration to determine the future course of US-Iran policy.
On one flank are the diplomats, and on the other is Vice President Cheney’s team and acolytes — who populate quite a wide swath throughout the American national security bureaucracy.
The Pentagon and the intelligence establishment are providing support to add muscle and nuance to the diplomatic effort led by Condi Rice, her deputy John Negroponte, Under Secretary of State R. Nicholas Burns, and Legal Adviser John Bellinger. The support that Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and CIA Director Michael Hayden are providing Rice’s efforts are a complete, 180 degree contrast to the dysfunction that characterized relations between these institutions before the recent reshuffle of top personnel.
However, the Department of Defense and national intelligence sector are also preparing for hot conflict. They believe that they need to in order to convince Iran’s various power centers that the military option does exist.
But this is worrisome. The person in the Bush administration who most wants a hot conflict with Iran is Vice President Cheney. The person in Iran who most wants a conflict is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Quds Force would be big winners in a conflict as well — as the political support that both have inside Iran has been flagging.
Multiple sources have reported that a senior aide on Vice President Cheney’s national security team has been meeting with policy hands of the American Enterprise Institute, one other think tank, and more than one national security consulting house and explicitly stating that Vice President Cheney does not support President Bush’s tack towards Condoleezza Rice’s diplomatic efforts and fears that the President is taking diplomacy with Iran too seriously.
This White House official has stated to several Washington insiders that Cheney is planning to deploy an “end run strategy” around the President if he and his team lose the policy argument.
The thinking on Cheney’s team is to collude with Israel, nudging Israel at some key moment in the ongoing standoff between Iran’s nuclear activities and international frustration over this to mount a small-scale conventional strike against Natanz using cruise missiles (i.e., not ballistic missiles).
This strategy would sidestep controversies over bomber aircraft and overflight rights over other Middle East nations and could be expected to trigger a sufficient Iranian counter-strike against US forces in the Gulf — which just became significantly larger — as to compel Bush to forgo the diplomatic track that the administration realists are advocating and engage in another war.
There are many other components of the complex game plan that this Cheney official has been kicking around Washington. The official has offered this commentary to senior staff at AEI and in lunch and dinner gatherings which were to be considered strictly off-the-record, but there can be little doubt that the official actually hopes that hawkish conservatives and neoconservatives share this information and then rally to this point of view. This official is beating the brush and doing what Joshua Muravchik has previously suggested — which is to help establish the policy and political pathway to bombing Iran.
The zinger of this information is the admission by this Cheney aide that Cheney himself is frustrated with President Bush and believes, much like Richard Perle, that Bush is making a disastrous mistake by aligning himself with the policy course that Condoleezza Rice, Bob Gates, Michael Hayden and McConnell have sculpted.
According to this official, Cheney believes that Bush can not be counted on to make the “right decision” when it comes to dealing with Iran and thus Cheney believes that he must tie the President’s hands.
On Tuesday evening, i spoke with a former top national intelligence official in this Bush administration who told me that what I was investigating and planned to report on regarding Cheney and the commentary of his aide was “potentially criminal insubordination” against the President. I don’t believe that the White House would take official action against Cheney for this agenda-mongering around Washington — but I do believe that the White House must either shut Cheney and his team down and give them all garden view offices so that they can spend their days staring out their windows with not much to do or expect some to begin to think that Bush has no control over his Vice President.
It is not that Cheney wants to bomb Iran and Bush doesn’t, it is that Cheney is saying that Bush is making a mistake and thus needs to have the choices before him narrowed.
— Steve Clemons

Comments

176 comments on “Cheney Attempting to Constrain Bush’s Choices on Iran Conflict: Staff Engaged in Insubordination Against President Bush

  1. Debt Management Program says:

    Thanks a lot for discussing this matter. I concur with your conclusions.The point that the data stated are all first hand on actual experiences even help more.
    Debt Management Program

    Reply

  2. wescot credit services says:

    I undoubtedly agree on the things that you have included here. Thanks for this.

    Reply

  3. wescot credit services says:

    No wonder why a lot of visitors tend to visit your site, its because you write your articles nicely. I hope you will write a lot of this.

    Reply

  4. dresses says:

    Give the world full of loves!

    Reply

  5. mbt says:

    this is such a great resource that you are providing and you give it away for free. I enjoy seeing websites that understand the value of providing a prime resource for free

    Reply

  6. whiplash says:

    Nice information really helpful share i also try it and amazingly its start work I am very happy to create my own twitter widget thanks dude for sharing.

    Reply

  7. Elephant says:

    Sadly the comatose public finds out years after the
    fact that Administration was warned by CIA on risks
    of invading Iraq:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18854414/
    How about some intelligence briefings NOW (non-AEI
    influenced) on the REAL RISKS OF BOMBING IRAN?
    Wouldn’t it be nice if corporate mainstream media
    could finally be coerced into their jounalistic
    responsibility of truthfully informing the public.

    Reply

  8. Elephant says:

    i remember hearing on npr an israeli general who had
    been the head of mossad in his career say that a
    strike on iran was ‘achievable’ and that the window
    of opportunity was until 1/20/09 before the next
    prez takes office. having israel hit them would make
    more sense. it was reported in the npr article that
    tactical israeli teams were training to use tactical
    nukes to take out underground iranian bunkers.

    Reply

  9. Ebooks says:

    Bombing Iran, in any scale or capacity, will almost
    certainly spiral into a wider conflict that’ll draw
    in Russia and China (considering their energy and
    strategic investments in Iran). it will also
    collapse the US dollar as the fiat world currency of
    choice, and trigger another Great Depression.
    Absolutely none of this is conjecture, and has been
    over-analyzed and written about before.

    Reply

  10. drive angry 2011 says:

    So…let me get this straight…for all intents and purposes, according to the insiders, Cheney is pretty much in the process of preparing a coup de tat to initiate conflict with Iran? If that’s not impeachable then God in heaven help us all! What the hell? The foundations of our country are being tested and we all need to pray for sanity to prevail, because in a wink of an eye the conflagration these people desire could be upon us. America, remember all those who died for this country this weekend and know that their memories, this Memorial Day 2007 are being dishonored by the likes of those who are subverting this nations principles and morals by conducting ill conceived plans of agression in order to achieve ill gotten gain. This administartion is a ugly stain on the American reputation of decency and honor and Carter has nothing to be ashamed of in calling it, the worst in history.

    Reply

  11. Eamonn says:

    Agree Cheny is evil ?same as the Israelis.
    Israelis want a war with Iran fought by USA , becuase the israelis do not have the will power as a nation to take losses.
    Akaa the Lebanon war. Look what happened to mighty Israeli army

    Reply

  12. Cheap Wicked Tickets says:

    Any chance I can buy one you built? email me if that’s cool ,I feel that I need more information on the topic. Can you suggest some resources please?, Excellent post!

    Reply

  13. Cheap Wicked Tickets says:

    Any chance I can buy one you built? email me if that’s cool ,I feel that I need more information on the topic. Can you suggest some resources please?, Excellent post!

    Reply

  14. injury claims says:

    This is such a great resource that you are providing and you give it away for free. I enjoy seeing websites that understand the value of providing a prime resource for free. I truly loved reading your post. Thanks!
    injury claims

    Reply

  15. Rico says:

    There is a way to stop this. When Israel attacks
    Iran, the US migh be able to keep Iran from
    retailiating by 1) expelling Israel’s ambassador to
    the US, 2) cutting all military and economic aid to
    Israel indefinitely, 3) sanctioning Israel in the UN
    until it has repaid all the damages caused by the
    strike on the Natanz facility.

    Reply

  16. Anders says:

    I was not surprised by your article. People with little thought can figure out how evil Cheny is? And how evil Israelis are.
    Israelis are hoping that U.S. engage a war with Iran, becuase the israelis do not have the man power and military power to attack Iran.
    Remember the Lebanon war. Look what happened to mighty Israeli army?
    They were defeated so badly that they have forgotten to get the israeli soldiers back.
    The attack against Iran will not work and U.S. must not fell into Israeli trap or Cheny’s crap.

    Reply

  17. Fioricet says:

    I though for a while it was just a sign of incompetence, disorganization, or some kind deliberate effort to confuse the public or whoever they were aiming their remarks at.
    But if I could scare up all the old reports I would probably find that it was a neo or Cheney’s office speaking to/for Israel or “announcing’ a position on something or whatever and the other camp retracting it the next day.

    Reply

  18. tower defense says:

    If you had full access to all intelligence or even if you were to do a diagram on the things reported by Hersh and other creditible journalist about all the plots,intrigues and funding and playing one fraction against another in the ME..you could probably come up with something that does fit our antiquated treason definition of “aiding the enemy in wartime”. Because slipping aid or info under the table to an enemy group to bring about sceniros you will act on in regard to another enemy is till aiding a enemy regardless of the motivation.

    Reply

  19. TonyForesta says:

    Why are Asmodeus, I mean cheney acolytes given any voice or credibility or any “…quite a wide swath throughout the American national security bureaucracy”? These fools were wrong on every issue, every time!!! The cheney fascist cabals have not been right about anything. I double dare any commentarian here to present one single instance where the cheney fascist cabals were right about anything. Name one single instance or issue. All we have is wanton profiteering and costly, bloody, catastrophic failure. Cheney is wrong on every issue. On every single issue that touches or speaks to the best interests of the Ameican people Azmodeous, – I mean cheney and his fascist cabals have been dead wrong. Please, with sugar on top, present on instance in which cheney and his fascist cabals have been right or accurate about any issue facing America. I double dare you.

    Reply

  20. Jason M. Dodson, SR. says:

    My Last Analysis of the Presidency of George W. Bush.
    A Positive View, By Me, a Political Hack From Wayback.
    Jason M. Dodson, SR.
    Marion, Illinois
    Wednesday, October 15th, 2008
    Well, there’s 97 days left of the Presidency of George W. Bush. On Friday, a movie about him will be released titled “W” which is said to portray his life in a very realistic manner, a movie directed by a very accurate film maker named Oliver Stone. This goes to show that George W. Bush, whether you love him or hate him, is a cultural figure that will be remembered for many, many generations, with both positive and negative memories.
    In the early years of Bush’s Presidency, and later, especially with the federal handling of Hurricane Katrina, my opinion of the man was very, very negative. I had called for the impeachment or resignation of the President, the Vice President, the entire administration cabinet, many federal department heads, and so on. My biggest concern and problem was not with the President himself, but I could not stand to see the continuous inaction that was prevalent during Katrina that cost people their lives in a time when immediate, second to second action was needed. Thousands of innocent people struggled for their survival during that crisis. My other problem rested with the Vice President, who I thought was not the proper person for that job due to his very hardline views on the usage of executive power and his stretching of Constitutional wording to fit his personal world-view.
    That aside, (though Katrina will never go away from my mind), there are many things that George W. Bush did and said that were decent and honorable. There are many actions that the man took during his Presidency that went unseen by many because the people were too focused on the negative, myself included. His response in the days after 9/11 his actions were noble, and so was his appointment of Michael Chertoff after the mistakes made during Katrina. Chertoff has proven to be the right man to lead our Homeland Security efforts. George’s support and handling of religious issues, such as faith-based initiatives, have been great throughout his terms, his support for AIDS prevention in Africa, his support for a missile shield in Europe, his support of using military technology instead of old 19th and 20th century military methods, his personal aggressive views against terrorism, his want for a new nationwide power grid after the blackouts in the middle of this decade, and many more of his views, are all commendable. His tax policies were commendable but unfortunately did not do enough to stabilize the credit and housing crisis that had already begun after the 9/11 market correction. More money was needed from federal sources and more of it was needed to go to middle-class families. In theory, he was right to tell people to spend because consumer spending does help to stabilize the economy. But the people were spending money that they didn’t have- the majority of the spending was financed money from credit cards and loans, not real debtless cash. This spiraled out of control. In the short term, it made the market look as if it was beginning to be stabilized. But after Hurricane Katrina, no amount of spending would help it. The President, no matter how much he could have done or had the presumed authority to have done, could not have single-handedly brought us out of this mess, nor could he alone have prevented it. The collective action of his administration, the entire Congress, and our military, could not have fully prevented many of the disasters that have happened to our nation over the last 7 to 8 years. Iraq? Yes. It was preventable. 9/11? No. People who wanted that to happen were going to make that happen whether George W. Bush or the American people wanted it to happen or not. It would have happened to Al Gore too.
    When George was elected in 2000, people were looking for a change from the “Washington as usual” politics. They wanted that “maverick” that John McCain and Sarah Palin have talked about in the 2008 presidential campaign. The American people didn’t want another 4 years of Clinton scandals, but they really didn’t want 4 years of a university professor type in Al Gore. Now, people can argue all they want about Florida and Ohio, and about whether both were “rigged” for Bush or Gore or had tried to be fixed in one direction or another. That was an unfortunate set of circumstances on both sides and both states should have heard all cases in November and December of 2000 that were relevant to the election of either candidate. But the states failed to do so. They allowed representatives of both parties to get involved, too many lawyers were in there doing dirty work, and the states themselves had many archaic voting methods in place that should have been updated years ago and brought into the technology age. “Hanging chads” and incomprehensible ballot arrangement of candidate’s names should never have been an issue if the states would’ve had their acts together.
    But we were given George W. Bush as a “fresh start” in Washington. George was truly a guy “you could sit down with after work and have a beer with”. I understand the want for this kind of man to run a nation. But Dick Cheney was not the man that should have been chosen as the Vice President. I believe that the ultimate decision of Cheney as VP was not something George had any final say-so about. George’s dad had the biggest say in this matter, from what I’ve heard. Maybe I’m wrong. But, nevertheless, I believe that the best choice that George could have made for his VP in 2000 would have been Chuck Hagel of Nebraska. Hindsight is 20/20, as they say.
    Bush is truly a man who wears his feelings right out there on his sleeves. If he doesn’t like something, he will tell you. From day one, he said that he was interested in removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq. George’s biggest beef with Saddam was that Saddam threatened his dad. If you were the person in charge of the entire military of your nation, and you had an easy target like Saddam Hussein who on numerous occasions had hired assassins to try to kill your father, wouldn’t you try to do something to stop them? I admit, it’s a bit selfish, but if someone was trying to kill my dad, I wouldn’t rule out any method of stopping that threat. Oil was secondary. I believe the oil was an issue for certain folks around George, but was not the driving issue for him. He truly believed that Saddam was a threat to his family and a threat to democracy in general. He felt that Hussein represented a culture that repressed freedoms and encouraged terrorist activities against free nations. Of course, we know now that the only real threat in Iraq was the fighting amongst themselves in the various factions vying for power within their own nation. Unfortunately, the people of Iraq were in such civil turmoil to begin with that they needed a strong hand like Hussein to keep it from going haywire. When we removed Hussein, that is exactly what happened. Then, the Iranian government, led by an extremist nutcase who doesn’t think that gays exist in Iran and that people didn’t get sent to gas chambers in Germany in WW2, gets involved in the ensuing chaos in Iraq by funding real terrorists to go in and disrupt any actual progress made by the US. In all of George’s good intentions, Iraq was a beehive that we shouldn’t have hit with a stick, we should have either left it alone or incinerated it with fire and utterly destroyed it. Being a rancher, I know George will get my analogy. I live on a small little ranch myself. When the hive gets too menacing, you burn it to a crisp, but until then, you leave it be.
    George is a human being with real human emotion. He cleans up his farm, picks up brush and trims trees, mows the grass, has real and down-home reactions to things that he disagrees with, and holds many traditional opinions that many people in rural Texas and other rural areas share. He really does believe in America. And, he believes in America the way that he believes in it, not the way that you or I may believe in it. And that’s okay. Assuming that no major terrorist attack happens in the US in the next 97 days, George W. Bush will have presided over a larger period of peace within the US borders than his predecessor Bill Clinton can say he presided over. We haven’t had a terrorist attack in the US since the days after 9/11. With Clinton, we had the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 by evil people who called themselves “Islamic”, and let’s not forget the 1995 homegrown terrorist attack in Oklahoma City by evil extremists who called themselves “Christian”, and another similar attack by a similar minded individual during the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. In all of the concerns we’ve had since 9/11, and many of the inconveniences at airports, and the irritating “terror alerts” we see on TV, in a strange yet assuring way, we have made ourselves more aware of our surroundings, and that is a good thing- it’s helped us become safer. We are now looking for things that we weren’t looking for before 9/11. And, in all of his imperfections, George W. Bush kind of helped us help ourselves with regard to safety in our own communities. Sure, the only thing we have to fear is fear itself, but good people who do not protect themselves in a responsible manner are doomed to be taken advantage of by negative people who not only wish to make us fear them- those kinds of negative people will actually carry out their vicious and murderous plans against those good people who do not protect themselves. There is no doubt that Bush was trying to help protect us by trying to intercept calls. But, as you and I know, there are other ways we can go about protecting ourselves, and the biggest way to protect ourselves is to ensure the unrestricted 2nd Amendment rights of every American citizen in good standing to arm themselves. If every potential criminal knew that their next victim may have a gun to protect themselves, the criminal would think twice before acting upon his criminal thoughts. Just my humble opinion as a Constitutionalist.
    In closing, I now believe that George W. Bush did the best he could for what he was given at the times he was given it. I think he would have done things differently if he could go back in time, but we all would, not just for America, but for our own lives too. We are human, and so is he. He is surely not the worst President in history, we still have Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon right up there holding those honors. Do I agree with everything Bush has done? No. Do I agree with him on some things? Yes. And George’s human side is the side I can most relate to. Had he stuck to that throughout his Presidency, and not listened to some of his dad’s advisors or Karl, and listened more to himself, he would have got most of it right, and I believe that wholeheartedly.
    Once a pessimist, but now a true “compassionate conservative”, your friend,
    Jason M. Dodson
    Marion, Illinois

    Reply

  21. yoga says:

    There is a way to stop this. When Israel attacks Iran, the US migh be able to keep Iran from retailiating by 1) expelling Israel’s ambassador to the US, 2) cutting all military and economic aid to Israel indefinitely, 3) sanctioning Israel in the UN until it has repaid all the damages caused by the strike on the Natanz facility.

    Reply

  22. Rachael Bliss says:

    I’m taking a poll on whether Cheney should be impeached. Please go to http://peoplepowergranny.blogspot.com and vote your passion.

    Reply

  23. Jackson says:

    I think we have reached the brink. The government doesn’t respond to the people any more. The majority of people in this country think we should get out of Iraq, but the war goes on. This isn’t the case in Britain, nor in Italy, nor in Spain. Democracy is working in these countries. But here in the USA, public opinion has no effect on our military adventures. Therefore, marching in the streets is futile, a frustrating demonstration of social disfunctionality. There are only a couple of actions that might turn the tide, as these include a general strike, which is unlikely, and tax resistance.
    Even a group as small as 2 or 300,000 people participating in a well publicised tax resistance movement might shake the pillars of government. Am I advocating tax resistance? Of course not, I am only giving you your options. The decision is yours. There is no advocating here, only an exchange of ideas.
    I grew up in the sixties when we had a thing called draft resistance. When one is being called up to go kill and be killed, the choice of whether to resist the draft isn’t as hard to make. A couple of years in jail or living in Canada was not a bad alternative to going to Vietnam for a lot people. But today, there is no draft, but the issues are the same. Of course it is easier to pay ones taxes than deal with the IRS, but sooner or later we have to take a stand. Am I advocating tax resistance. No, of course not, I am just laying out the options.

    Reply

  24. Gary DeVaney says:

    This is Gary DeVaney. (Captain, USAR / ARNG – retired)
    UPDATE: I have thought long and hard about it and have come to the conclusion that:
    George W. Bush is the GREATEST leader I have ever seen in my entire lifetime.
    President George W. Bush is responsible for over 1,000,000 Iraqi deaths since he waged a pre-emptive war on a country that could not defend itself. His primary reasons for waging war on the Iraqis turned out to be lies.
    The GREATEST leader is the effective leader whose “will” can successfully break, kill or control all other’s wills under all circumstances.
    To date, that is exactly what President George W. Bush has successfully done. His “will” leads, and he successfully gets results through others.
    I haven’t been able to break George W. Bush’s will to end the illegal war that he was ordered to start. Can you?
    Neither can his fellow Republicans – even those who do have a conscience and want to stop him.
    Neither will the deceptive – proven to be wimpy – Democrats.
    Certainly his chosen (oil-owning) enemy cannot break his will. They will continue to die trying.
    Up to now, Bush has successfully controlled the wills of all the American people. Specifically, to date, he has controlled the will of the US Senate, the US Congress, the mainstream media, most US Christians and most of the wills of the prominent leaders of the rest of the World.
    Can you tell me who will stop him – and at what price?
    George W. Bush’s government has become Adolf Hitler’s Nazi government – except, Bush HAS the weapons of mass destruction. He HAS the technology. He HAS the control of “space-command”. And, he GETS all of the International Banker’s money and backing that he asks for. He HAS all that he needs to do it all – whereby Hitler did not.
    Nothing breaks or controls human wills faster than killing a million people. George W. Bush HAS accomplished that. Again, that heinous “accomplishment” fearfully controls most of the cowardly wills in the US Congress and Senate and most of the other prominent wills in leadership positions worldwide.
    All previous US Presidents combined have borrowed about 1.01 trillion dollars up to the year 2000.
    President George W. Bush alone HAS borrowed about 1.05 trillion dollars since the year 2000. (CNN News: 6-18-2007)
    To make it perfectly clear, President George W. Bush HAS borrowed more money from the International Bankers than all the previous US Presidents have borrowed combined. That makes the International Bankers very happy because your children will be paying endless interest on the money that is being spent to fulfill their agenda.
    By the way, I view that the Internatonal Bankers are the bosses of the Bush gang. Nobody dare know them or point the finger at them. To appeal to the child, the International Bankers are “The Wizard of OZ” that controls all from behind the curtain.
    George W. Bush is the GREATEST leader I have ever seen. Like God, his will and deeds are not subject to law.
    According to corporate-media-propaganda, his will indicates that the killing has just begun.
    Neither you nor I can break his will to end the New World Order / One World Government / International Banker agenda. Have we all been beaten and are we all controlled by his will? Is “free-will” over for America?
    The Biblical God must be proud of His appointed leader, President George W. Bush, who may go down in history as the GREATEST leader ever.
    My Regrets, Gary DeVaney

    Reply

  25. figless says:

    Wow, and we’ve been focusing on big bad bush when tricky dicky is pullin stunts that defy common sense and decency–well no one is really shocked by that, but this just reinforces that not one, but both these dangerous fools must GET OUT! We gotta impeach these cats and reverse all the damage to our constitutional laws! I think that the mere thought of Dick as dictaor is chief rather than shrub may be what is stalling the impeachment–or maybe it is because the “decider” is keeping it from coming up at all by some means…

    Reply

  26. Colin Mincy says:

    They say a picture is worth a 1,000 words. Look at that picture of the Vice-President. He is one dimented human being. Although Bush once had trouble getting this old saying out, I’ll simply say, “Fool me once…shame on you. Fool me twice…shame on me.”
    Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice, even Colin Powell are damaged goods. They have been wrong on so many levels about this “global war on terror,” that took us first to Afghanistan where we were making some headway before we pulled all of our resources to head to Iraq…where Osama Bin Laden and the terrorists responsible for 9/11 are not.
    How these people got re-elected again is beyond me. Part of it is the cult-mentality of the American people as someone mentioned earlier. And part of it is that the Kerry-Edwards ticket was backwards in 2004. Edwards would’ve beat Bush handily.

    Reply

  27. K says:

    The ONLY solution to all the madness is found at:- http://jahtruth.co.uk/plan.htm

    Reply

  28. Nasser says:

    who can say cheney is wrong about Iran? I am asking you ahmadi nejad and Iranian leader want atomic bomb or not? they try to make it and put on dirty hands(like alqadeh) for US or not?
    9/11 was based on preplan by Bin Ladan at Clinton time and they executed it during gray time just a few months later. why you can not see real story? why you want destroy this beautiful country by your false point of views.

    Reply

  29. D. Sullivan says:

    Impeach Cheney as fast as possible!! The movement to impeach these two power-mongers had better get its act together in a hurry. They need to start with Cheney who is a dangerous fool. He has already been leading Bush around by the balls and now he is planning to dictate policy? Well, Bush had better get control of himself and realize that he is the president, not the CEO of this country. He cannot allow a maniac who is only interested in oil, rather the power that the control of oil would provide, dictate his next move.
    Allowing them to spread this war throughout is a giant mistake and will lead us down the path of distruction. There would be no way out of it. With Iran, Syria will follow.
    Bush and Cheney have sworn to defend the constitution of the US from enemies both foreign and domestic. I’m afraid that the only way they could do that would be to kill each other!

    Reply

  30. Tom says:

    By its unconditional support of Israel, the US is hugging a deadly viper to its breast. The US is completely controlled by Israel. So is the UK, Canada and Australia. France and Germany are in much the same state. The administration of the US (Pres, VP,Pentagon, etc) are traitors to the American people. They have sold their souls for
    M O N E Y. It is sad to see a nation with so much potential for, and opportunity to do good, hijacked by criminals.

    Reply

  31. Tom says:

    By its unconditional support of Israel, the US is hugging a deadly viper to its breast. The US is completely controlled by Israel. So is the UK, Canada and Australia. France and Germany are in much the same state. The administration of the US (Pres, VP,Pentagon, etc) are traitors to the American people. They have sold their souls for
    M O N E Y. It is sad to see a nation with so much potential for, and opportunity to do good, hijacked by criminals.

    Reply

  32. daytripper says:

    >>>Well, let’s hope the Suez comparison comes true, because that ended Britain as an independent foreign power.>>Posted by: ahem at May 24, 2007 02:37 PM <<<
    ////////////////////////////////////////////////////
    Suez proved it. not ended it. our status as an independant foriegn power ended in 1940.
    I love the USA, i really must stress this point. but it has become inherently militaristic and to a certain extent has become the new prussia.
    without fundemental change to the way your state interacts with the rest of the world, its only likely to get worse.

    Reply

  33. JM says:

    I think in our Secretary of State there is a secret message to the world: the US thinks so little of diplomacy and statecraft that Bush has made a symbol of our contempt in Condoleezza Rice, a black female–a gender and race that is still viewed as second-class by a majority of men (and some women) holding political power.
    To have to treat a low-caste-appearing individual as if she wields power may be viewed as a sexual or race insult, whether that is expressed or not. I mean, get real: how many American white men, let alone Middle Eastern men, would like to have policy dictated to them by a black female?
    BushCo knows that the rest of the world is hardly less racist and sexist than America. To present a Bush domestic servant (which is what Condi is, at bottom) as Secretary of State means that the position itself has become a token, a parody, a caricature. Sending Condi Rice to a country is a gesture of scorn–an exercise of in-your-face semiotics, if you will.

    Reply

  34. kathleen says:

    The “cakewalk in Iraq” zealots have been all over the MSM the last four years beating their war drums against Iran. They all have yellow cake on their faces!
    Reuel Marc Gerecht, Cheney, Perle, Ledeen, Micheal Rubin has been absent as of late), Bolton, Woolsey (just recently in Ohio trying to push Divest from Iran leglistlation drawn up by Aipac to Ohio legislators)
    Most of the unsubstantiated claims about Iran’s “alleged” nuclear weapons program have basically gone unchallenged by the MSM. One of the more recent examples of this is when NPR’s Neil Conan allowed John Bolton to repeat for 4o minutes on Talk of the Nation these claims. Neil Conan did not challenged him once..not once.
    Some polls report that 70% of Americans now believe that Iran posesses nuclear weapons. This belief did not come to be via osmosis.
    Deja fucking bloody vu! Deja Bloody Vu!

    Reply

  35. Prosecuting A Sitting President, VP says:

    The President isn’t defending the Constitution, but expanding illegal warfare. Staff in the VP office are making the situation worse, as they did with Iraq. Congress refuses to act.
    There is a solution. The VP and President can be prosecuted — for this non-sense in Iraq, and other things — outside the Impeachment process.
    Pass this link:
    [ http://www.fas.org/irp/ops/ci/king/ssci_turley.html#1 ]
    Jonathan Turley, “From Pillar to Post”: _The Prosecution of Sitting Presidents_, 37 American Criminal Law Review 1049-1106 (2000)
    – – – – – – –
    Whether Congress does or does not wake up to the intrigue inside the VP’s office is meaningless. Despite war crimes, prisoner abuse, the Congress chooses to do nothing. We the People must defend this constitution from this President, Vice President, and Congress.
    Will the legal community assert its oath to defend the Constitution against the President, VP, and congress; or will the American legal community assent to political pressure and refuse to ac, just as the US Attorneys did in the Justice Department?
    Time for We the People to direct the legal community to prosecute the President and Vice President outside the impeachment process. Congress refuses to act. It only takes one attorney. They are outnumbered; if they refuse, We the People may transform _this_ Congress and legal community into something that is responsive.

    Reply

  36. GoRonGo says:

    Again, I would suggest that people watch Mosaic (Middle Eastern news translated into English on LinkTV.org) ,as well as read the Israeli papers, and see what is being said in Israel herself.
    The majority of Israelis want Iran taken out but want the U.S. to do it (71% in a poll done this month)
    Israel has operatives at the highest level in the Pentagon and the U.S. government. Evidence? Feith, Perle, Wolfowitz, Libby, Wurmser, Abrams, etc., and ad nauseam.
    Israel also has operatives in the U.S. media. Paula Zahn, who I thought was going to lick his toes when she interviewed Netanyahu. Wolf Jerusalem Post Blitzer. Rupert Murdoch and his flunkies over at Fox. The New Yorker (read it lately? I went through one issue and highlighted all references to Jews and the whole damn magazine was yellow afterwards. And Seymour Hersh can be quite the limited hang-out type — NOT THAT I AM EQUATING ALL JEWS WITH ISRAEL, just the ones who put themselves in powerful position in order to serve the interests of Israel)
    And you have Meyrav Wurmser’s former outfit, MEMRI, which “translates” the most inflammatory documents put out by Muslims and then paints them as mainstream Muslim opinon quoted all over the U.S. mainstream media as “proof” that all Muslims are terrorist.
    But Israel has ceased to be the 900 pound gorilla that shall never be criticized. P.J. O’Rourke went after her on Bill Maher’s show this last week, according to my spouse (who is a Jew but very much against Zionism) O’Rourke said something like “Israel should be in Germany.”
    I have never considered the Bible as a land claim so that sounded exactly right to me. Why should the Arabs, and especially the Palestinians, have to suffer the curse of Zionism?
    They have been traditionally hospitable to the Jews and this is what they get in return?
    USING THE BLOOD OF THE CHILDREN I LOVE WHILE ISRAEL BANKRUPTS MY COUNTRY????
    Chutzpah would not even begin to describe many in Israel and the people here who support her…

    Reply

  37. Shahram Niktabe says:

    I was not surprised by your article. People with little thought can figure out how evil Cheny is? And how evil Israelis are.
    Israelis are hoping that U.S. engage a war with Iran, becuase the israelis do not have the man power and military power to attack Iran.
    Remember the Lebanon war. Look what happened to mighty Israeli army?
    They were defeated so badly that they have forgotten to get the israeli soldiers back.
    The attack against Iran will not work and U.S. must not fell into Israeli trap or Cheny’s crap.

    Reply

  38. Shahram Niktabe says:

    I was not surprised by your article. People with little thought can figure out how evil Cheny is? And how evil Israelis are.
    Israelis are hoping that U.S. engage a war with Iran, becuase the israelis do not have the man power and military power to attack Iran.
    Remember the Lebanon war. Look what happened to mighty Israeli army?
    They were defeated so badly that they have forgotten to get the israeli soldiers back.
    The attack against Iran will not work and U.S. must not fell into Israeli trap or Cheny’s crap.

    Reply

  39. Pissed Off American says:

    The troll is back.

    Reply

  40. concernedemocrat says:

    I think that you left wing freaks ought to get some of your facts and priorities straight.
    In the Suez War, Egypt committed blockaded the Israelis prior to the Israeli attack. That’s an act of war. What the French and the British engagement did was allow the Israelis who were not considered a powerful military force at the time to defend themselves. If Ike had merely sold the Brits oil at that time, the Brits would not have been in all that much trouble at the time although the French were about to begin to kill over a million arabs to defend their colonies in North Africa.
    Furthermore, in Lebanon, they don’t need American or Israeli help to kill each other, they had a very nice civil war up and running long before the Israelis ever set foot in their country and the current situation pretty much proves that. If the Lebanese really gave a rat’s ass about the Palestineans, they would not have kept them penned in such squalid camps for generations.
    And finally, for all you brits and anglophiles out there that can’t wait to condemn the Israelis for anything, I think you ought to remember who blew up the subway on 7/7. Last I checked it was the Jews, the Israelis or the Americans. Ah, but then again we killed Christ so it doesn’t really matter…

    Reply

  41. Pissed Off American says:

    “There is a way to stop this. When Israel attacks Iran, the US migh be able to keep Iran from retailiating by 1) expelling Israel’s ambassador to the US, 2) cutting all military and economic aid to Israel indefinitely, 3) sanctioning Israel in the UN until it has repaid all the damages caused by the strike on the Natanz facility.”
    ROFLMAO!!!! If Israel attacks Iran, it will be with this Administration’s blessing, our military’s logistical support, and quite probably arms supplied by the United States. Your list is a fantasy. Never happen.

    Reply

  42. Buddy says:

    There is a way to stop this. When Israel attacks Iran, the US migh be able to keep Iran from retailiating by 1) expelling Israel’s ambassador to the US, 2) cutting all military and economic aid to Israel indefinitely, 3) sanctioning Israel in the UN until it has repaid all the damages caused by the strike on the Natanz facility.
    The US should also look the other way if Iran, through its Hezbollah proxies, initiates small scale operations against Northern Israeli towns in retaliation to the civilians who will be inevitably killed in a strike on Natanz.
    That would (short of preventing any strike on Iran altogether) probably keep the conflict from escalating into a nuclear WWIII.

    Reply

  43. Jeremy Wells says:

    The unending revelations and speculations about the relative sanity, barbarity or nuances of programs of the individual players in the Bush regime make for a wonderful pastime, a cottage industry of punditry and a cornucopia of profit for booksellers.
    Never discussed among these “progressive” babblers is any radical (i.e. go to the root core of the problem) discussion of WHY all this is happening, WHO is benefitting for the unending wars, and most importantly, WHAT is to be done to end this massive attack upon the peoples and ecology of the planet.
    A simplistic and sequential list of root causes:
    1. The decline of U.S. capitalism since 1970. Labor intensive manufacturing has moved overseas.
    Decline in profitability in traditional capitalist activity within the U.S. Competition from China,Japan, Europe. etc.
    2. The transformation of U.S. capitalism since 1970. U.S. capitalists find new ways to make retain and maximize wealth. Minimize taxation. Privatization of public social services to eliminate tax support services. Massive buildup of military industrial complex. Creation of ways of wealth creation (hedge funds, stock market manipulations,etc.). All such money making schemes minimize or eliminate U.S. labor.
    3. The Project for the New American Century. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the U.S. the now the super military power. The U.S. can militarily enforce trade deals such as NAFTA, etc. if necessary detroy anyone objecting to the looting of foreign countries.
    4. The root cause of what is happening is CAPITALISM. To end imperialist wars, to end global warming, to end poverty, to restore public schools, to establish universal health (instead of health for profit), WE THE PEOPLE MUST END CAPITALISM. We must end global capitalism before it literally destroys us all.
    A little much to swallow in a couple of paragraphs! So please check out the World Socialist Web Site at http://www.wsws.org
    Read it daily for a while, compare their analysis with other “progressive” sites, such as Common Dreams, http://www.commondreams.org etc.
    Thanks for reading all this stuff!
    Jeremy

    Reply

  44. Karen says:

    SUPPORT KUCINICH’S PETITION TO IMPEACH !!!!!!!
    If you love this planet you do so!
    These people in the White House are insane.

    Reply

  45. injector says:

    The appearance of The Shrub as a candidate for office was a great gift to the neo-cons, considering his elementally weak persona.
    Salivating at the chance, they rallied behind him.
    That he would ask The Dick to select a suitable VP was a return favor.
    Now The Shrub is operated by the neo-cons to produce an existential crisis to their benefit.

    Reply

  46. smartypants says:

    I’ve started to think that Cheney’s prescription medications and pace maker for his heart have been acting up for the past several years, to a disasterous effect around the world, particularly in Middle East and in this one (US). He sure doesn’t look and feel and act like the same person from several decades ago.

    Reply

  47. charles Brough says:

    The whole Administration wants to bomb Iran; it is just that Cheney is impatient as the end of their term draws near. So, he is working on the backup.
    They may be able to avoid Israeli involvement. The Saudis and U.S. interests have convinced the Iraqi Sunnis that only the U.S. military and Saudi financial help can save part of the Kurdish oil area for them and enable them to carve out their own nation from Shiite Iraq. To accomplish this, they must get rid of the Al Queda cells. Anyone notice yet the lull in the number of our service men killed by explosive divices?!
    Our naval and air armada we sent there has been waiting for this change. Already, Fox and even CNN are drumming up the Iran issue. The spiritual head of Iran wants war also. It drives people back to their religion.
    charles, http:humanpurpose.simplenet.com

    Reply

  48. Pissed Off American says:

    There ain’t gonna be no Civil War here ’cause your side is a bunch of pussies, and pussies don’t fight, especially civil wars. Grudgingly go along to get along, little ladies; whine in your effeminate way as the Real Men do what’s gotta be done.
    Posted by Harlon
    Why are Bush supporters always so frickin’ ignorant?

    Reply

  49. tom says:

    When the theocratic civil war comes boppin’ along (as we fight multiple conflicts in the Gulf, lose our jobs to cheaper markets, gasp at the widening economic gaps, pay larger food and fuel prices and generally get rather testy) we’ll all know who to thank.
    If there’s any justice (or a God for that matter) Dick Cheney will soon be stewing next to Falwell and is ilk in the pits of Hell.

    Reply

  50. Frank says:

    Cheney’s “seminal” contribution to this masturbatory exercise of a story, is but a repeat of what is already known about this evil son of a bitch. It isn’t an Oswald we need, but condoms used more judiciously.

    Reply

  51. zyrktec says:

    i remember hearing on npr an israeli general who had been the head of mossad in his career say that a strike on iran was ‘achievable’ and that the window of opportunity was until 1/20/09 before the next prez takes office. having israel hit them would make more sense. it was reported in the npr article that tactical israeli teams were training to use tactical nukes to take out underground iranian bunkers.

    Reply

  52. Harlon says:

    William & Tim!
    There ain’t gonna be no Civil War here ’cause your side is a bunch of pussies, and pussies don’t fight, especially civil wars. Grudgingly go along to get along, little ladies; whine in your effeminate way as the Real Men do what’s gotta be done.

    Reply

  53. Chuckles says:

    Don’t worry Pelosi, Reid and the Democrats will come up with legislation to stop this.
    Just kidding. They already gave Bush and Cheney the go ahead to attack Iran, so what’s the fuss about?

    Reply

  54. Mr.Murder says:

    I erased points to post elsewhere, I think the most plausible actor in the Lebanon/Israel item is Russia and Putin.
    He helped provide part of the steroided lies after Niger forgeries were out, to push proliferation reports through regarding nuclear well heads in Eastern Europe, supposedly missing as possible dirty bomb elements.
    The spy poisoning is an attempt to distance himself from his actions and cover dirty leads or draw attention to them by others on cointel flip.
    It helped Israel get the west against Iraq, something they wanted to provide cover for their moves vs. Palestine. Part of the deal was in Israel’s own venture interests taking south Lebanon, Putin knew it would screw up the trans Arabian/Trans Iraqi pipelines and help his northern pipelines(Hastert lobby) gain better chances of gaining venture capital.
    Nothing but a G thang to Putin the gangster. He’s very adept. He helped get the US the war it wanted in return for getting market access. The EU is pushing back, one of the actors most likely to have helped the INC with the forgery is poisoned, only the Ledeen/EU energy minister talks from AEI remain unchecked.
    The EU energy minister was from Spain, he could corroborate the material Ledeen’s wife inserted to Senate INTEL material through Santorum’s office re:Niger/Rome.
    Thus the Niger forgery, its tubes lie(conventional, Italian Air Force, see Nur-al Cubicle) and its well head lie(Have you forgot about Poland?) had neocons and world venture capital types at play with Putin’s need to launder graft and elevate his influence.
    NATO’s back is broken, Russia has EU energy futures in grasp, a former loose end was tied shut.
    Israel thought it could game things, and go sister state with Lebanon(again) when the assassinations dealt a blow to Syrian influence. They too were gamed after suffering collateral results. Putin knew regardless the West would hurt influence, the central Mediterranean would be hurt, his oil stans pipelines could move forward, and he’d be overlooked in trade, proliferation and energy matters.
    Part of the well head deal was to avoid closer scrutiny on loose nukes. The Iraq war lies got shaped to western ambitions and the detriment of enemies being plausibly manipulated.
    Sorry for the aside but it bears scrutiny.

    Reply

  55. Mr.Murder says:

    Condi is interested, perhaps Chevron’s ready to play again.
    My take earlier this week was that Lebanon is the key to the trans Arabian pipeline/trans Iraqi pipeline intersection.
    The client state/American bases are being built north of it, Syria is being pushed out of the picture by cointel, the Sauds need that oil to hide their post peak numbers(Oil for Food) and it will fund continued client state status.
    When Israel hit Lebanon the USA was quiet. Waiting to see how it played from another perspective. China made an official statement, then we started talking about it. The next day Israel an official UN post manned by a Chinese observer.
    This Iran bilateral talk is working with Chinese proxies, funding our own debt. We can’t go to Iran without China’s approval and they are developing client status as an energy supplier.
    How did we develop any inroads to Iran with the heated talk? It wasn’t just the leverage of extra carrier groups and the war appropriations supplemental passing. Included was a bipartisan trip to Syria in hopes of developing contacts.
    Condi’s still about the oil and the shoes, but Cheney’s about himself. He’s tight with Bandar(ARAMCO and Michael Sheldon Cheney background history). We went to Syria(bipartisan trip) and Cheney went right back to Arabia, we learn of Sunni madrassa funding in Lebanon since.
    Lebanon the hinge, Syria the mediary for our dealing with Iran by client proxies of the check signing Chinese. If we accord Iran the Chinese lock in long term energy demand, the gulf stability helps fuels prices level for growth everywhere, and the strongest sister state plays in Iraq.
    Cheney doesn’t give a shit and wants guns blazing into his final days in office, ‘unitary executor’ is what he runs on as part of the unitary dogma.
    Careerists want some resolve reached. We need help with Iraq, the Saudis and Cheney vs. Rice and the midsouth Asian oil interests. They worked together in concert to get us there, but the individual interests are starting to form fissures.
    Thus seeing some chance to lessen the time in Iraq, if done to promise. The Dems pass spending, Pelosi stealth reintroduced Condi through middle men, China continues to fund it to all parties present interests. We get bailed on Iraq to an extent, Syria eases refugee tension and gets help with Lebanon which is the doorway west.
    The strategic oversight of China is playing bigger than people see, a bipartisan back channel afford this window open, and careerists see redemption chances to limit the loss all the military and diplomatic ranks suffered under the strains of Iraq and Afghanistan. Dems worked through Syria, passed the funding, see this chance. Cheney still wants wide open war and no oversight.
    Which sphere wins it? Who determines how we act in this theater? Iran can help us with Afghanistan too.
    Cheney/Sauds or bipartisans/central Asia?

    Reply

  56. Jack Forcade says:

    Cheney forged a plan, the Cheney Plan, where the US attacks Iran if there is a second 911. No investigation, no determination whether Iran truly is culpable, just an excuse for war with Iran. Zbigniew Brzezinski, in February 2007, warned of the possibility of our gov fabricating a terrorist even to trigger the catalyst of war with Iran. In his speech to Congress: This was an unmistakable warning to the US Congress, replete with quotation marks to discount the “defensive” nature of such military action, that the Bush administration is seeking a pretext for an attack on Iran. Although he did not explicitly say so, Brzezinski came close to suggesting that the White House was capable of manufacturing a provocation “including a possible terrorist attack within the US” to provide the casus belli for war.
    “http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/feb2007/brze-f02.shtml”>http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/feb2007/brze-f02.shtml
    With Cheney not planning of ways to stop a potential second 911, he instead sets plans focused narrowly upon his target of opportunity, Iran. The Cheney plan is predicated on the presumption that Iran would be behind a Second 9/11 and that punitive bombings could immediately be activated, prior to the conduct of an investigation, much in the same way as the attacks on Afghanistan in October 2001, allegedly in retribution for the alleged support of the Taliban government to the 9/11 terrorists.
    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060810&articleId=2942“>http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060810&articleId=2942″>http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060810&articleId=2942
    Thus the concept initially posted of Cheney attempting to force this war appears more and more plausible. Amy event deemed terrorism in the US can trigger another planned war, specifically with Iran. PNAC all the way. Also check out PPOG or P2OG.

    Reply

  57. nobody says:

    The Problem is not so much Cheney, Bush, etc but who will come after them. All the crimes commited now will set a precedent for future presidents, who grab ever more power with an amazingly shrinking constitution.
    Bush is not the devil, he is just opening the door for the next tyrant. Already now he has enough power to rule without congress, but not enough for the end-game: an unlimited term, plus a heredetary throne. Watch out for Bush III.
    Sorry my spelling, english is not my language.

    Reply

  58. Tim says:

    RE:William Souter- I couldn’t agree withyoumore , Sir. What amzes me about this administration . Is how they contiually play the , “UN ain’t got noth’in on the USA” game card. Yet? Here we see UN internationalism being promoted in the US under many different disguises.
    And many other circumstances that have been allowed to perpetuate our lives here in the USA, to our detriment as a Free country. Sad!

    Reply

  59. William Souter says:

    The United States needs a second civil war, and this is where we’re headed. It cannot be prevented.

    Reply

  60. Rusty Scalf says:

    Is it a foregone conclusion that Cheney and Rice are at odds, and not simply working in parallel on a Plan A and Plan B? Perhaps both are happening with the full knowledge of the Oval Office, and both are seen as contingencies.
    Just playing devil’s advocate.

    Reply

  61. Sandy says:

    Dan, your 2:39 p.m. post is exactly what worries me most.
    sigh
    They are definitely capable of anything. We’ve already seen that.
    And, with all those ships out there on the Iranian coast….and all the possibilities now (Lebanon, etc. etc.) for “mishaps” to occur…it won’t take much for some little thing to trigger the whole tinderbox to ignite. Even so-called “unintended” consequences.
    sigh
    It just feels weird to be able to read all this….and realize that we, together here…wherever we are reading and writing from…. are witnessing a “history”….unfolding….that tops anything that the most vivid imagination of any novelist could have created.
    Truth so much stranger than fiction. You can’t make this shit up. Too complex. Too unbelievable. Happening.
    sigh

    Reply

  62. martin cadwell says:

    An interesting heads up on how the war may be extended to Iran. Good work Steve. US Imperialism and its Israeli client are in an untenable position. Many of its leading generals and policy gurus (Clark, Odum, Battiste, Brzezenski, etc) have warned that a war with Iran will likely mean 1) 6 to 8 dollar a gallon gasoline which will trigger a world wide recession and huge unrest in the US and 2) a crisis in Iraq where US supply lines are already in grave danger and US forces are exposed to large scale destruction if the Shia militias actively join the military resistance. (Many retired Israeli mil-pol-intell leaders are similarly concerned about having to simultaneously fight the Palestinians, Hezbollah, and the Syrians while dodging Iranian missiles). On the other hand, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and the Iraqi resisistance (including the as of now largely militarily quiet Mahdi Army of M. Sadr, the most important Iraqi nationalist leader) are growing stronger over time. Israel is facing a crisis too. Its joint operation with the US to put Fateh in control of the PA thru arms, intelligence, and cash aid is a sign of desparation, not strength. Attacking Iran will precipitate a much greater crisis now. But will the US colonialists be better able to fight these adversaries after another year or two of bleeding in Iraq? Remember, a year or two ago, the guerillas in Iraq were estimated to be about 20,000. Now there number is over estimated at about 100,000. If Fateh is able to defeat Hamas, everyone will know it was with US-Israeli assistance and mark it as a collaborator. How long can it remain in power under those circumstances without direct Israeli armed support? A new intifada is imminent and it may merge with the refugee movements in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Not for nothing are the Israeli godfathers, using extreme economic and military pressure, preparing to make the Palestinians an offer they can’t refuse—and which no one but a national traitor would accept.
    And what of Hezbollah? If truly democratic elections were held in Lebanon, Nazrallah (or his designate) would be President. If Lebanon is left in peace too long, Hezbollah might control the State and Lebanese Army, not just its own highly competent militia which the Israelis could not defeat last summer.
    Hence, the surge in diplomacy and Cheney’s surge in aggressive war-mongering and planning, and Bush’s ambivalence. The US economy is tottering on the brink of collapse from its stupendous national debt and concommittant expansion of the money supply (which every year in Iraq only makes worse), the apparent end of virtually limitless consumer credit expansion (most clearly seen in the contraction of the housing and home equity markets), and an underlying looming overproduction production crisis resulting from the globalization of industrial production (largely to China). This collection of bubbles must burst and soon. Attacking Iran will probably cause a spike in oil and gas prices that could prick the weakest of these compound bubbles. But for our rulers, that would provide an opportunity to blame Iran (and its oil related efforts to retaliate against US agression) for the economic chaos. See—-every cloud does have a silver lining after all……..See my website, http://www.motorcitybeacon.blogspot.com for a poem about all this called The Writing on the Wall and a take on Cheney’s visit to the Stennis.

    Reply

  63. martin cadwell says:

    An interesting heads up on how the war may be extended to Iran. Good work Steve. US Imperialism and its Israeli client are in an untenable position. Many of its leading generals and policy gurus (Clark, Odum, Battiste, Brzezenski, etc) have warned that a war with Iran will likely mean 1) 6 to 8 dollar a gallon gasoline which will trigger a world wide recession and huge unrest in the US and 2) a crisis in Iraq where US supply lines are already in grave danger and US forces are exposed to large scale destruction if the Shia militias actively join the military resistance. (Many retired Israeli mil-pol-intell leaders are similarly concerned about having to simultaneously fight the Palestinians, Hezbollah, and the Syrians while dodging Iranian missiles). On the other hand, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and the Iraqi resisistance (including the as of now largely militarily quiet Mahdi Army of M. Sadr, the most important Iraqi nationalist leader) are growing stronger over time. Israel is facing a crisis too. Its joint operation with the US to put Fateh in control of the PA thru arms, intelligence, and cash aid is a sign of desparation, not strength. Attacking Iran will precipitate a much greater crisis now. But will the US colonialists be better able to fight these adversaries after another year or two of bleeding in Iraq? Remember, a year or two ago, the guerillas in Iraq were estimated to be about 20,000. Now there number is over estimated at about 100,000. If Fateh is able to defeat Hamas, everyone will know it was with US-Israeli assistance and mark it as a collaborator. How long can it remain in power under those circumstances without direct Israeli armed support? A new intifada is imminent and it may merge with the refugee movements in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Not for nothing are the Israeli godfathers, using extreme economic and military pressure, preparing to make the Palestinians an offer they can’t refuse—and which no one but a national traitor would accept.
    And what of Hezbollah? If truly democratic elections were held in Lebanon, Nazrallah (or his designate) would be President. If Lebanon is left in peace too long, Hezbollah might control the State and Lebanese Army, not just its own highly competent militia which the Israelis could not defeat last summer.
    Hence, the surge in diplomacy and Cheney’s surge in aggressive war-mongering and planning, and Bush’s ambivalence. The US economy is tottering on the brink of collapse from its stupendous national debt and concommittant expansion of the money supply (which every year in Iraq only makes worse), the apparent end of virtually limitless consumer credit expansion (most clearly seen in the contraction of the housing and home equity markets), and an underlying looming overproduction production crisis resulting from the globalization of industrial production (largely to China). This collection of bubbles must burst and soon. Attacking Iran will probably cause a spike in oil and gas prices that could prick the weakest of these compound bubbles. But for our rulers, that would provide an opportunity to blame Iran (and its oil related efforts to retaliate against US agression) for the economic chaos. See—-every cloud does have a silver lining after all……..See my website, http://www.motorcitybeacon.blogspot.com for a poem about all this called The Writing on the Wall and a take on Cheney’s visit to the Stennis.

    Reply

  64. martin cadwell says:

    An interesting heads up on how the war may be extended to Iran. Good work Steve. US Imperialism and its Israeli client are in an untenable position. Many of its leading generals and policy gurus (Clark, Odum, Battiste, Brzezenski, etc) have warned that a war with Iran will likely mean 1) 6 to 8 dollar a gallon gasoline which will trigger a world wide recession and huge unrest in the US and 2) a crisis in Iraq where US supply lines are already in grave danger and US forces are exposed to large scale destruction if the Shia militias actively join the military resistance. (Many retired Israeli mil-pol-intell leaders are similarly concerned about having to simultaneously fight the Palestinians, Hezbollah, and the Syrians while dodging Iranian missiles). On the other hand, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and the Iraqi resisistance (including the as of now largely militarily quiet Mahdi Army of M. Sadr, the most important Iraqi nationalist leader) are growing stronger over time. Israel is facing a crisis too. Its joint operation with the US to put Fateh in control of the PA thru arms, intelligence, and cash aid is a sign of desparation, not strength. Attacking Iran will precipitate a much greater crisis now. But will the US colonialists be better able to fight these adversaries after another year or two of bleeding in Iraq? Remember, a year or two ago, the guerillas in Iraq were estimated to be about 20,000. Now there number is over estimated at about 100,000. If Fateh is able to defeat Hamas, everyone will know it was with US-Israeli assistance and mark it as a collaborator. How long can it remain in power under those circumstances without direct Israeli armed support? A new intifada is imminent and it may merge with the refugee movements in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Not for nothing are the Israeli godfathers, using extreme economic and military pressure, preparing to make the Palestinians an offer they can’t refuse—and which no one but a national traitor would accept.
    And what of Hezbollah? If truly democratic elections were held in Lebanon, Nazrallah (or his designate) would be President. If Lebanon is left in peace too long, Hezbollah might control the State and Lebanese Army, not just its own highly competent militia which the Israelis could not defeat last summer.
    Hence, the surge in diplomacy and Cheney’s surge in aggressive war-mongering and planning, and Bush’s ambivalence. The US economy is tottering on the brink of collapse from its stupendous national debt and concommittant expansion of the money supply (which every year in Iraq only makes worse), the apparent end of virtually limitless consumer credit expansion (most clearly seen in the contraction of the housing and home equity markets), and an underlying looming overproduction production crisis resulting from the globalization of industrial production (largely to China). This collection of bubbles must burst and soon. Attacking Iran will probably cause a spike in oil and gas prices that could prick the weakest of these compound bubbles. But for our rulers, that would provide an opportunity to blame Iran (and its oil related efforts to retaliate against US agression) for the economic chaos. See—-every cloud does have a silver lining after all……..See my website, http://www.motorcitybeacon.blogspot.com for a poem about all this called The Writing on the Wall and a take on Cheney’s visit to the Stennis.

    Reply

  65. martin cadwell says:

    An interesting heads up on how the war may be extended to Iran. Good work Steve. US Imperialism and its Israeli client are in an untenable position. Many of its leading generals and policy gurus (Clark, Odum, Battiste, Brzezenski, etc) have warned that a war with Iran will likely mean 1) 6 to 8 dollar a gallon gasoline which will trigger a world wide recession and huge unrest in the US and 2) a crisis in Iraq where US supply lines are already in grave danger and US forces are exposed to large scale destruction if the Shia militias actively join the military resistance. (Many retired Israeli mil-pol-intell leaders are similarly concerned about having to simultaneously fight the Palestinians, Hezbollah, and the Syrians while dodging Iranian missiles). On the other hand, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, and the Iraqi resisistance (including the as of now largely militarily quiet Mahdi Army of M. Sadr, the most important Iraqi nationalist leader) are growing stronger over time. Israel is facing a crisis too. Its joint operation with the US to put Fateh in control of the PA thru arms, intelligence, and cash aid is a sign of desparation, not strength. Attacking Iran will precipitate a much greater crisis now. But will the US colonialists be better able to fight these adversaries after another year or two of bleeding in Iraq? Remember, a year or two ago, the guerillas in Iraq were estimated to be about 20,000. Now there number is over estimated at about 100,000. If Fateh is able to defeat Hamas, everyone will know it was with US-Israeli assistance and mark it as a collaborator. How long can it remain in power under those circumstances without direct Israeli armed support? A new intifada is imminent and it may merge with the refugee movements in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria. Not for nothing are the Israeli godfathers, using extreme economic and military pressure, preparing to make the Palestinians an offer they can’t refuse—and which no one but a national traitor would accept.
    And what of Hezbollah? If truly democratic elections were held in Lebanon, Nazrallah (or his designate) would be President. If Lebanon is left in peace too long, Hezbollah might control the State and Lebanese Army, not just its own highly competent militia which the Israelis could not defeat last summer.
    Hence, the surge in diplomacy and Cheney’s surge in aggressive war-mongering and planning, and Bush’s ambivalence. The US economy is tottering on the brink of collapse from its stupendous national debt and concommittant expansion of the money supply (which every year in Iraq only makes worse), the apparent end of virtually limitless consumer credit expansion (most clearly seen in the contraction of the housing and home equity markets), and an underlying looming overproduction production crisis resulting from the globalization of industrial production (largely to China). This collection of bubbles must burst and soon. Attacking Iran will probably cause a spike in oil and gas prices that could prick the weakest of these compound bubbles. But for our rulers, that would provide an opportunity to blame Iran (and its oil related efforts to retaliate against US agression) for the economic chaos. See—-every cloud does have a silver lining after all……..See my website, http://www.motorcitybeacon.blogspot.com for a poem about all this called The Writing on the Wall and a take on Cheney’s visit to the Stennis.

    Reply

  66. KharKhodeti says:

    THEN MAYBE IT IS TIME FOR CHENEY NOT TO BE A VICE PRESIDENT ANYMORE.
    PRESIDENT CHENEY HAS A GOOD RING TO IT.
    CONDI’s ASS WILL BE GRASS.
    AND SO WILL MULLAHS’ COLLECTIVE ASSES IN IRAN
    FORGE AHEAD! DEFEAT ISLAMIC FASCISM IN IRAN, THE HEAD OF THE SNAKE!

    Reply

  67. dan says:

    This really is not surprising. I do not remember exactly which article I read about Cheney’s morbid fascination with power and death. According to this article, when he was in undergraduate school, he became eerily fascinated with one professor’s description of fascism. The professor took note of this and became quite nervous and concerned. When a later article came out describing Cheney’s ideology that seemed frighteningly parallel to fascism, the professor was horrified at what he had predicted would happen.

    Reply

  68. Tim says:

    Dick Cheney has no Cabinet power influence in the Whitehouse unless……….He became President.
    Get it?
    Think JFK/Lydon B. Johnson. Apply with care and concealment.
    Equals. Done deal to Blow the hell out of Iran.
    WW3!
    Can’t Happen? All I’ve heard is how evil these people are. What’s to stop them?

    Reply

  69. Tim says:

    Dick Cheney would have no Cabinet powers in the Whitehouse unless……….He became President.
    Get it?
    Think JFK/Lydon B. Johnson. Apply with care and concealment.
    Equals. Done deal to Blow the hell out of Iran.
    WW3!
    Can’t Happen? All I’ve heard is how evil these people are. What’s to stop them?

    Reply

  70. Dan says:

    Bombing Iran, in any scale or capacity, will almost certainly spiral into a wider conflict that’ll draw in Russia and China (considering their energy and strategic investments in Iran). it will also collapse the US dollar as the fiat world currency of choice, and trigger another Great Depression. Absolutely none of this is conjecture, and has been over-analyzed and written about before.
    One then gets the sense that the powers *behind* Bush/Cheney (and both parties, really) are so desperate to preserve their status quo that they’re at this point willing to ‘burn the village to save it’….that village being both Iran as well as the American way of life.
    Our enemy is truly within.

    Reply

  71. go says:

    We are witnessing treason in high places. This is not new, I have just read the excellent Brothers by David Talbot detailing the JFK administrations
    struggle to stop the first strike airforce of Curtis Lemay from nuking Russian and Helms’s rouge CIA from war mongering in Cuba and Vietnam.
    American national security is compromised by arrogance and ignorance in high places as Washington Note and the link to Counterpunch shows. Impeachment might not stop the neo-con facists, the last election doesn’t make any difference with the Democrats voting AIPAC money one more time.

    Reply

  72. serial catowner says:

    Part of the problem here is that Bush is a very small man, surrounded by small men and women. He probably knows what Cheney is doing, but it inspires fear in him, not anger.
    There isn’t even an ounce of Harry Truman in George Bush.

    Reply

  73. pauline says:

    Isn’t it just amazing how the same warmongering neo-cons keep exposing their morally bankrupt behavior?
    from Wayne Madsen —
    May 25-27, 2007 — The word we have received from World Bank sources is that neo-con chick magnet and outgoing World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz already has a new girlfriend after he and Shaha Riza called it quits. There is word that Shaha Riza, who is well respected by many in the international civil service financial community, may return to some capacity in the bank or one of its affiliate organizations.
    There is more disturbing news that WMR has received about Wolfowitz after he was named Deputy Defense Secretary in early 2001. Our sources have told us that after Wolfowitz became Deputy Defense Secretary under Donald Rumsfeld, his wife, Clare Selgin, wrote a letter to President George W. Bush to inform him that her husband had been carrying on an affair with Shaha Riza while he was Dean of the Johns Hopkins University Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS) and that it was continuing while Wolfowitz was serving as the Pentagon’s number two man. However, our sources claim that Bush never saw the letter. It was allegedly intercepted by Vice President Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff and close Wolfowitz friend, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby.
    While some might consider Mrs. Selgin’s letter to have been the product of a bitter wife, she was acting responsibly in informing the President that as the number two man at the Pentagon with the highest level security clearances, her husband was subject to potential blackmail. However, Libby, who saw fit to compromise the identity of a covert CIA agent and her non-official cover firm, did not worry about national security implications while he served as Cheney’s National Security Adviser.
    The cavalier Wolfowitz continued his relationship with Shaha Riza after taking over the reins at the World Bank, a major factor in his ouster. However, our World Bank sources have revealed that the team of neo-con advisers and staff that Wolfowitz brought with him into the bank engaged in improper activities while on official overseas business for the World Bank. One senior adviser to Wolfowitz was caught in repeated compromising positions with young women in Latin America and Southeast Asia and it is said that his trips to both regions were merely “sex tours” designed as official business. Wolfowitz personally signed off on these types of trips for his coterie of cronies and advisers.
    Wolfowitz’s “bad governance” of the World Bank not only included the special salary deal he cut for Shaha Riza but a policy of using bank resources to engage in unnecessary travel for the purpose of vacations and cementing private business deals. One such Wolfowitz trip to Turkey reportedly had more to do with Wolfowitz’s private financial interests than bank business.

    Reply

  74. vachon says:

    A treasonous Vice President and we’re hemming and hawing about the sources. The fact that it’s entirely plausible from this Vice President is the real story. That this particular “episode” may not be true is beside the point. That we can sit here and know that Cheney is able to engage in this behavior and has shown a deliberate and verifiable willingness to do it, is the story.

    Reply

  75. Carroll says:

    Col Pat Lang, after linking to the Steve’s article, also today recommended reading up on the “Welch Club” in an article at Counterpunch…the gist of it is:
    “The Club is named for its godfather, David Welch, assistant to Secretary of State Rice who is the point man for the Bush administration and is guided by Eliot Abrams.
    Key Lebanese members of the Welch Club (aka: the ‘Club’) include:
    The Lebanese civil war veteran, warlord, feudalist and mercurial Walid Jumblatt of the Druze party( the Progressive Socialist Party or PSP)
    Another civil war veteran, warlord, terrorist (Served 11 years in prison for massacres committed against fellow Christians among others) Samir Geagea. Leader of the extremist Phalange party and its Lebanese Forces (LF) the group that conducted the Israel organized massacre at Sabra-Shatilla (although led by Elie Hobeika, once Geagea’s mentor, Geagea did not take part in the Sept. 1982 slaughter of 1,700 Palestinian and Lebanese).
    The billionaire, Saudi Sheikh and Club president Saad Hariri leader of the Sunni Future Movement (FM).
    Over a year ago Hariri’s Future Movement started setting up Sunni Islamist terrorist cells (the PSP and LF already had their own militia since the civil war and despite the Taif Accords requiring militia to disarm they are now rearmed and itching for action and trying hard to provoke Hezbollah).
    The FM created Sunni Islamist ‘terrorist’ cells were to serve as a cover for (anti-Hezbollah) Welch Club projects. The plan was that actions of these cells, of which Fatah el-Islam is one, could be blamed on al Qaeda or Syria or anyone but the Club.
    To staff the new militias, FM rounded up remnants of previous extremists in the Palestinian Refugee camps that had been subdued, marginalized and diminished during the Syrian occupation of Lebanon. Each fighter got $700 per month, not bad in today’s Lebanon.
    The first Welch Club funded militia, set up by FM, is known locally as Jund-al-Sham (Soldiers of Sham, where “Sham” in Arabic denotes Syria, Lebanon, Palestine & Jordan) created in Ain-el-Hilwa Palestinian refugee camp near Sidon. This group is also referred to in the Camps as Jund-el-Sitt (Soldiers of the Sitt, where “Sitt” in Sidon, Ain-el-Hilwa and the outskirts pertain to Bahia Hariri, the sister of Rafiq Hariri, aunt of Saad, and Member of Parliament).
    The second was Fateh-al-Islam (The name cleverly put together, joining Fateh as in Palestinian and the word Islam as in Qaeda). FM set this Club cell up in Nahr-al-Bared refugee camp north of Tripoli for geographical balance.
    Fatah el-Islam had about 400 well paid fighters until three days ago. Today they may have more or fewer plus volunteers. The leaders were provided with ocean view luxury apartments in Tripoli where they stored arms and chilled when not in Nahr-al-Bared. Guess who owns the apartments?
    According to members of both Fatah el-Islam and Jund-al-Sham their groups acted on the directive of the Club president, Saad Hariri.
    So what went wrong? “Why the bank robbery” and the slaughter at Nahr el-Baled?
    According to operatives of Fatah el-Islam, the Bush administration got cold feet with people like Seymour Hirsh snooping around and with the White House post-Iraq discipline in free fall. Moreover, Hezbollah intelligence knew all about the Clubs activities and was in a position to flip the two groups who were supposed to ignite a Sunni ­Shia civil war which Hezbollah vows to prevent.
    Things started to go very wrong quickly for the Club last week.
    FM “stopped” the payroll of Fateh el-Islam’s account at the Hariri family owned back.
    Fateh-al-Islam, tried to negotiate at least ‘severance pay’ with no luck and they felt betrayed. (Remember many of their fighters are easily frustrated teenagers and their pay supports their families). Militia members knocked off the bank which issued their worthless checks. They were doubly angry when they learned FM is claiming in the media a loss much greater than they actually snatched and that the Club is going to stiff the insurance company and actually make a huge profit.
    Lebanon’s Internal Security Forces (newly recruited to serve the bidding of the Club and the Future Movement) assaulted the apartments of Fatah-al-Islam Tripoli. They didn’t have much luck and were forced to call in the Lebanese army.
    Within the hour, Fatah-al-Islam retaliated against Lebanese Army posts, checkpoints and unarmed, off-duty Lebanese soldiers in civilian clothing and committed outrageous killings including severing at four heads.
    Up to this point Fatah-al-Islam did not retaliate against the Internal Security forces in Tripoli because the ISF is pro-Hariri and some are friends and Fatah al-Islam still hoped to get paid by Hariri. Instead Fatah al Islam went after the Army.
    The Seniora cabinet convenes and asks the Lebanese Army to enter the refugee camp and silence (in more ways than one) Fatah-al-Islam. Since entrance into the Camps is forbidden by the 1969 Arab league agreement, the Army refuses after realizing the extent of the conspiracy against it by the Welch Club. The army knows that entering a refugee camp in force will open a front against the Army in all twelve Palestinian refugee camps and tear the army apart along sectarian cracks.
    The army feels set up by the Club’s Internal Security Forces which did not coordinate with the Lebanese Army, as required by Lebanese law and did not even make them aware of the “inter family operation” the ISF carried out against Fatah-al-Islam safe houses in Tripoli.
    Today, tensions are high between the Lebanese army and the Welch Club. Some mention the phrase ‘army coup’.
    The Club is trying to run Parliament and is prepared to go all the way not to ‘lose’ Lebanon. It still holds 70 seats in the house of parliament while the Hezbollah led opposition holds 58 seats. It has a dutiful PM in Fouad Siniora.
    The club tried to seize control of the presidency and when it failed it marginalized it. Last year it tried to control of the Parliamentary Constitutional Committee, which audits the government’s policies, laws and watch dogs their actions. When the Club failed to control it they simply abolished the Constitutional Committee. This key committee no longer exists in Lebanon’s government.
    The Welch Club’s major error was when it attempted to influence the Lebanese Army into disarming the Lebanese Resistance led by Hezbollah. When the Army wisely refused, the Club coordinated with the Bush Administration to pressure Israel to dramatically intensify its retaliation to the capture of the two soldiers by Hezbollah and ‘break the rules’ regarding the historically more limited response and try to destroy Hezbollah during the July 2006 war.
    The Welch Club now considers the Lebanese Army a serious problem. The Bush administration is trying to undermine and marginalize it to eliminate one of the last two obstacles to implementing Israel’s agenda in Lebanon.
    If the army is weakened, it can not protect _over 70% of the Christians in Lebanon who support General Aoun’s Free Patriotic Movement. The F.P.M. is mainly constituted of well educated, middle class and unarmed Lebanese civilians. The only protection they have is the Lebanese Army which aids in maintaining their presence in the political scene. The other type of Christians in Lebanon is the minority, about 15% of Christians associated with Geagea’s Lebanese Forces who are purely militia. If the Club can weaken the Army even more than it is, then this Phalange minority will be the only relatively strong force on the Christian scene and become the “army” of the Club.
    Another reason the Club wants to weaken the Lebanese Army is that the Army is nationalistic and is a safety valve for Lebanon to ensure the Palestinian right of return to Palestine, Lebanese nationhood and the resistance culture led by Hezbollah, with which is has excellent relations.
    For their part, the Welch Club wants to keep some Palestinians in Lebanon for cheap labor, ship others to countries willing to take them (and be paid handsomely to do so by American taxpayers) and allow at most a few thousand to return to Palestine to settle the ‘right of return’ issue while at the same time signing a May 17th 1983 type treaty with Israel with enriches the Club members and gives Israel Lebanon’s water and much of Lebanon’s sovereignty.
    Long story short, Fatah el-Islam must be silenced at all costs. Their tale, if told, is poison for the Club and its sponsors. We will likely see their attempted destruction in the coming days.
    Hezbollah is watching and supporting the Lebanese army.”

    Reply

  76. easy e says:

    My apologies for previous triple post. Kept getting screened out.
    How about Bush’s claim at yesterday’s news conference that he did everything in his power to avoid war with Iraq. That he was forced to invade because of Saddam’s continued defiance and failure to “disarm”. SAY WHAT? Iraq had nothing to disarm.
    On to Iran. Years from now we may find out that IRAN had no nuclear weapons program to destroy.
    But that’s not what this is all really about, is it.

    Reply

  77. easy e says:

    Sadly the comatose public finds out years after the fact that Administration was warned by CIA on risks of invading Iraq:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18854414/
    How about some intelligence briefings NOW (non-AEI influenced) on the REAL RISKS OF BOMBING IRAN? Wouldn’t it be nice if corporate mainstream media could finally be coerced into their jounalistic responsibility of truthfully informing the public.

    Reply

  78. Chesire11 says:

    Wurmser was the lead author of a 1996 policy paper for then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.”
    Just as an aside, does Wurmser’s use of the term “Realm” to describe strike anyone else as peculiar? In political terms, a “realm” typically refers to a kingdom, not a parliamentary democracy. I think it gives a hint of how these people view the world…

    Reply

  79. easy e says:

    Sadly the comatose public finds out years after the fact that Administration was warned by CIA on risks of invading Iraq:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18854414/
    How about some intelligence briefings NOW (non-AEI influenced) on the REAL RISKS OF BOMBING IRAN? Wouldn’t it be nice if corporate mainstream media could finally be coerced into their jounalistic responsibility of truthfully informing the public.

    Reply

  80. easy e says:

    Sadly the comatose public finds out years after the fact that Administration was warned by CIA on risks of invading Iraq:
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18854414/
    How about some intelligence briefings NOW (non-AEI influenced) on the REAL RISKS OF BOMBING IRAN? Wouldn’t it be nice if corporate mainstream media could finally be coerced into their jounalistic responsibility of truthfully informing the public.

    Reply

  81. pauline says:

    Is it Hannah or Wurmser?
    Raw Story had this back on October 19, 2005 —
    “. . .Wurmser’s cooperation with Fitzgerald would certainly come as no surprise to those who have been following his career. Last year, he was questioned by the Federal Bureau of Investigation for his possible role in leaking U.S. security secrets to Israel.
    According to a 2004 story in the Washington Post, the FBI interviewed officials in Cheney’s office and the Pentagon, including Hannah and Wurmser, former Defense Policy Board member Richard Perle, Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, to determine if they were involved in leaking U.S. security secrets to Israel, the former head of the Iraqi National Congress Ahmed Chalabi and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
    The revelation that Hannah and Wurmser have become prosecution witnesses, as well as being identified as the original sources of the leak, indicates Fitzgerald now may be looking into the motive for outing Plame and how Administration officials sought to derail a vocal critic of Iraq intelligence.
    The two administration hawks were instrumental in shaping the Bush administration’s agenda with Iraq prior to 9/11.
    Wurmser was the lead author of a 1996 policy paper for then-Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” It called for removing Saddam from power in Iraq as part of a broad strategy to transform the region and remove radical regimes. Eight months before 9/11, Wurmser called for joint U.S.-Israeli air strikes on Iraq, Iran, Syria and Libya.
    Hannah and Wurmser were first named as possible suspects in the Plame leak by Wilson, Plame’s husband, in his book, The Politics of Truth.
    “In fact, senior advisers close to the president may well have been clever enough to have used others to do the actual leaking, in order to keep their fingerprints off the crime,” Wilson writes.
    “John Hannah and David Wurmser, mid-level political appointees in the vice-president’s office, have both been suggested as sources of the leak “Mid-level officials, however, do not leak information without the authority from a higher level,” Wilson notes.”
    http://www.rawstory.com/news/2005/Second_Cheney_aide_cooperating_in_leak_1019.html

    Reply

  82. Chesire11 says:

    “O.K….so it wasn’t Abrams….but then again isn’t he famous for “not leaving any fingerprints”?..or am I thinking of one of the other criminals?”
    Nah, Abrams leaves fingerprints, he just doesn’t cast shadows.

    Reply

  83. owenz says:

    Is it really “insubordination” if Cheney doesn’t bother to hide it?
    This story just seems like a cranked up version of the beurocratic infighting that has been going on since the early days of the Administration, when Powell and Rumsfeld were butting heads. Sure, Cheney has a huge office and therefore the capability to “go around” Condi and her allies. Does that make it “insubordination” in a White House where the only thing anyone’s ever been punished for is a lack of hawkishness?
    I trust Steve is telling the truth about his sources, who are no doubt aligned with the Condi faction in the White House. But here’s the thing: if you change just a few words in this article, the story transforms from “remarkable” to “utterly unsurprising.” Of course Cheney is trying to get around Condi and the so-called moderates! Of course he is relying on his huge Office of the VP and friends at AEI! It really just comes down to semantics: one man’s “insubordination” is another man’s “beurocratic infighting.” I suppose Cheney’s actions seem more aggressive and erratic if the president has truly thrown in his lot with Condi and friends…but something tells me GW hasn’t totally turned his back on old Dick either.
    Sy Hersh was reporting about Dick Cheney’s sincere and bloodthirsty desire to attack Iran long ago. This is just a natural extention of that story. Don’t get me wrong…Cheney IS nuts…and the fact that he wants to start another war IS a big deal…I’m just saying the story isn’t really new or suprising, other than perhaps the language being used by the Condi wing of the White House to describe Cheney’s actions (“insurbordination”).

    Reply

  84. Carroll says:

    Speaking of which….when you add the press and official “anon” sources and so forth leaks…who the hell knows what is what. There are so many plants, and plants to upend other plants, and a thousand and one little agenda corners eveywhere adjusting their plants because of other plants….gawd, it’s a never ending rat farris wheel. This is typical”
    http://www.warandpiece.com/blogdirs/006162.html

    Reply

  85. Carroll says:

    O.K….so it wasn’t Abrams….but then again isn’t he famous for “not leaving any fingerprints”?..or am I thinking of one of the other criminals?

    Reply

  86. Carroll says:

    I don’t know, I really don’t go for the good cop bad cop theory…for several reasons.
    One thing that has gone on forever is the pattern of some WH official saying something and then the next day Condi’s office or a different aide at the WH contridicting him. I mean just look back on all the news reports…someone contridicting or clarifying something the one in the other camp said, over and over and over again.
    I though for a while it was just a sign of incompetence, disorganization, or some kind deliberate effort to confuse the public or whoever they were aiming their remarks at.
    But if I could scare up all the old reports I would probably find that it was a neo or Cheney’s office speaking to/for Israel or “announcing’ a position on something or whatever and the other camp retracting it the next day.
    I read the other day about Bush himself firing a lesser figure, a woman in the WH who works on the China issues because “after” she was told “not” to say something regarding China or to the China reps she did it anyway. I do think there is a group, Cheney’s and Abram’s who actually are or think they are running the country and ignore Bush
    for the most part because he is not exactly hands on CEO anyway and the most public of his team also feel secure that they won’t be ditched because of Bush’s famous “loyalty” thing or his embrassment at having to admit he can’t even control the people under him.

    Reply

  87. Proudhon says:

    If Cheney’s staff has gone to at least three different entities to sell this idea it’s not insubordination. It must certainly be known in the White House, so we are safe in assuming that the WH either does not want to put a stop to it (no insubordination here) or is unable to (this makes the WH the subordinate, so no insubordination here either).
    Meanwhile, it seems absurd to me that anyone would go trotting around Washington with something like this and expect it to remain secret. Are these guys this stupid or is this story a plant? Or both?

    Reply

  88. Den Valdron says:

    Okay, first things first. We have to recognize that there are no good guys in the Bush administration. They’re all scumbags and at best, there’s a relative graduation of scumbaggery.
    John Ashcroft, for instance, pretty much shit all over the constitution every chance he got. But then, we’re now finding out there’s some stuff he wouldn’t do. It doesn’t make him good, except on a very relative scale.
    Guys like Cheney, Rice, Gates et al are horrorshows one and all. Don’t inspect integrity or vision. They pretty much all have the same vile and violent worldview, and they’d all dearly love to nuke Iran.
    The splits we are seeing come down to power struggles by ruthless evil people. Cheney having insinuated his people into DOD wants a war. Rice in her perch at State wants to build her little empire, have power. If there’s a war, she’s not the one in charge, she’s left on the sidelines. So Rice doesn’t want a war until its on her terms and in her interests. This is basically a turf war between Rice and Cheney.
    Right now, Rice has the Presidents ear and the Presidents bed, so Cheney is frozen out. That’s why the disparagement

    Reply

  89. Steve Clemons says:

    I have reasons for not wanting to out the individual on this blog — but I can say unequivocably that the individual is not Elliott Abrams. Abrams has never to my knowledge denigrated President Bush, and he has not been party to putting the President in a situation in which he is trying to tie the President’s hands and narrow choices.
    Steve Clemons

    Reply

  90. Via says:

    Steve, I still believe there is an element of good cop/bad cop at work here. It has been used throughout this administration. Good theatre. I believe also that Cheney has NEVER trusted Bush on foreign policy (or much else, probably)and has been driving the PNAC agenda from the beginning. He convinced Bush that the way to have a ‘successful’ administration was to be a ‘War President’. I think that Cheney is simply exerting even more influence and pressure now, toward war with Iran, as the curtain prepares to close on this misguided, misbegotten horror show that is known as the Bush administraton.
    In response to the commenter who said “what else is new” above, isn’t that an astounding response to the acts committed by this administration? Have we a nation become so numbed by their abuse of the Constitution that we heave a collective sigh of boredom when we contemplate a second war of aggression that may soon be waged in our names?

    Reply

  91. dr.steveb says:

    sorry for duplication… your spam prevention mechanism made me think first time post was not up. My humblest apologies.
    Meanwhile have posted on this at Daily Kos:
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/25/8026/20702
    Thanks Steve C for all you do.

    Reply

  92. ssdrtghj says:

    ELLIOT ABRAMS

    Reply

  93. Dr.SteveB says:

    Breaking this report down, it really does NOT have much that is new:
    We know, from other reports including of course Sy Hersh in New Yorker but also from NY Times reports on Gates & Southern Command, that the Neocon camp led by Cheney still wants war with Iran, while Realists led by DoD and little bit by Rice, is pushing back for talking.
    We know with Lebanon II & Syria, there is ongoing attempt to get Israel to act as proxy. We know AEI is part of ongoing war party from Iraq overall to current “surge” as way to keep it going.
    Seriously, what specifically is new.
    Oh… and for Cheney’s actions to present W with fait accompli… it’s called treason.

    Reply

  94. Steve Clemons says:

    dr. steveb — what is new for me, as i wrote in the post, is the specificity of bush-denigrating commentary from one of cheney’s closest national security aides. this level of candor is remarkable for one who draws power — from another who draws power from the President. That is what is new in my mind — not the fact that someone is trying to push the Israelis to spark a war.
    the element of insubordination is not that cheney is trying to send signals that he wants to bomb iran. everyone already knows that. what can’t be part of a good cop/bad cop thesis is that cheney’s person is suggesting that bush himself can’t be trusted on Iran policy — and that is driving Cheney’s team’s behavior to nudge Israel.
    best regards,
    Steve Clemons

    Reply

  95. dr.steveb says:

    Breaking this down, it really is not that much new. We know, from other reports including of course Sy Hersh in New Yorker but also from NY Times reports on Gates & Southern Command, the Neocon camp led by Cheney still wants war with Iran while Realists led by DoD and little bit by RIce, is pushing back for talking. We know with Lebanon II & Syria, there is ongoing attempt to get Israel to act as proxy. We know AEI is part of ongoing war party from Iraq overall to current “surge” as way to keep it going.
    Seriously, what specifically is new.
    Oh… and for Cheney’s actions to present W with fait accompli… it’s called treason.

    Reply

  96. Mr.Murder says:

    Apologies on the triple post, it kept sending error messages/resubmit prompts.

    Reply

  97. Mr.Murder says:

    Cheney’s always been the boss, ever since he selected himself to run and set up the largest VP’s staff/office in history.
    This is simple posturing, Rice always did Cheney’s bidding via Hadley at NSA.
    She has no political future, no matter how bad they want to craft the shoe diva otherwise.

    Reply

  98. Mr.Murder says:

    Cheney’s always been the boss, ever since he selected himself to run and set up the largest VP’s staff/office in history.
    This is simple posturing, Rice always did Cheney’s bidding via Hadley at NSA.
    She has no political future, no matter how bad they want to craft the shoe diva otherwise.

    Reply

  99. Mr.Murder says:

    Cheney’s always been the boss, ever since he selected himself to run and set up the largest VP’s staff/office in history.
    This is simple posturing, Rice always did Cheney’s bidding via Hadley at NSA.
    She has no political future, no matter how bad they want to craft the shoe diva otherwise.

    Reply

  100. gmathol says:

    Very sad, but it is the American people, who like their German predecessors let it happen: facism.
    …still think facism is not part of your country?
    Your are terribly wrong!

    Reply

  101. Mackie says:

    Jim Rockford said:
    “Get real. Iran has or will have shortly, nukes. They’ll do just what they said would: nuke Israel… ”
    I wonder what will happen after that?

    Reply

  102. Heil Mary says:

    This article completely contradicts what my coworker who parties with the Cheneys told me: She claims Dick Cheney told her he doesn’t want to be president and just wants to go home to Wyoming. I didn’t believe her. Maybe Bush and Cheney are carrying out some sort of agreed to Good Cop/Bad Cop plausible denial role playing to confuse everyone over their shared criminal secret agendas of genocide and oil looting.

    Reply

  103. Jim Rockford says:

    I doubt this seriously. If there is anything the Bush Admin is, it’s lazy.
    If anything this is one more disinformation campaign designed to scare the Iranians into co-operating. A dead ploy because the Iranians know they have the upper hand, and don’t believe based on direct American rolling over and playing dead since 1979 that there are any consequences for attacking America. Other than gaining our surrender.
    Israel is not under Olmert going to do anything. They know they’re going to get nuked, Ahmadnutjob just today promised another Holocaust, but Israel’s leadership is dithering and divided like France in December 1939. Israel will not bail out the US out of it’s Iran with nukes problem. At best they’ll strike back when they are all dead.
    Israel couldn’t even take care of Syria and Hezbollah when it mattered (to make a deterrence point to Iran). Case closed.
    Second, if GWB was all upset about ABC’s and CBS’s revelations why didn’t they protest at all? A phony leak to scare Iran and conceal Bush’s lack of any plan at all.
    More likely, just as Presidents: Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton, this President will kick the can down the road about what to do with Iranian nukes.
    I.E., a deniable AQ/Hezbollah operation to nuke several US cities will happen (we have zilch intel on these guys), this or the next President will look over 3-10 million US dead, and wonder what to do.
    Cheney is probably right, war with Iran is inevitable. They want us destroyed, and figure they can hide behind Hezbollah (active in the US) to do it. They have a history of doing stupid things like that: Buenos Aires bombing, Khobar Towers (as we policed their enemy Saddam), cozying up to Osama etc.
    You don’t need aircraft carries to take out Manhattan Skyscrapers. Imagine what the Mullahs could do to us with nukes and Hezbollah? Particularly since they really do hate us for our individual freedom (to reject their religion) and have said so many times.
    If Bush planned some “war” activity against Iran, he already has so many reasons: 1979 Embassy hostage crisis, Beirut Barracks bombing, Khobar Towers (all the Mullahs and IRGC commanders were indicted) and the World Court indictment for the Buenos Aires bombings. That he’s not said one word ought to tell you he’s not going to do spit.
    If Cheney was some evil genius at a time when Bush is very, very weak with his base he’d be up in arms against Illegal Immigration and Amnesty and making speeches, along with advocating hitting Iran (backed by strategic leaks of Iran’s plans to nuke us matched with their public statements of “imagine a world without America” etc.) Cheney isn’t saying spit.
    The idea that Cheney would have the inept and clueless Olmert government which can’t even deal with Gaza “Road Warrior” society sending over 3,000 Qassam rockets into southern Israel would bend to Darth Cheney’s mindcontrol rays is laughable and tinfoil hat time. [Sharon would have already nuked Iran; Barak cut a deal, any deal, with Abbas then nuked Iran. Olmert will appoint a commission.]
    Get real. Iran has or will have shortly, nukes. They’ll do just what they said would: nuke Israel and the US, the latter likely through deniable proxies like Hezbollah or bin Laden who they are collaborating with (Saad bin Laden has taken refuge in Iran). And then we’ll have to pay for not taking the action when the cost would be lower instead of higher.

    Reply

  104. stilichio says:

    “Steve…this is definitely the scariest post you’ve posted in a long time.”
    I dunno – I was quite relieved to see that Bush is actually *against* war with Iran.

    Reply

  105. visitor says:

    Do a search on American Enterprise Institute, look for the Wikipedia website. These people are also the ones putting the pressure on the scientists to alter the global warming issue, paying 10,000 to each of them. This is getting deeper and deeper.
    I wasn’t expecting to come back here so soon,
    busy in the kitchen, but I want to drop that name I mentioned above. Check this man out, Dave Addington. He was Cheney’s attorney before he became his Aid. He is supposedly the one that has had some kind of control over Bush, reading every document first, before it leaves or comes in to Bush’s desk. He is VERY private, and from whatI understand, feared by their associates.

    Reply

  106. Bobby S says:

    It’s just World War III in the making under Bush. Don’t worry, according to Bush’s Bible, there’s a happy ending to World War III and America can win it. Lifeless Democrats seem to go along with it since Iraq is now an endless party to them, too.

    Reply

  107. Ardie says:

    American Enterprise Institute (AEI) is the Neocon think tank. It is an extremely dangerous organization. It provided the phony evidence for the invasion of Iraq. Anything AEI touches is almost sure to spell trouble.

    Reply

  108. Ardie says:

    American Enterprise Institute (AEI) is the Neocon think tank. It is an extremely dangerous organization. It provided the phony evidence for the invasion of Iraq. Anything AEI touches is almost sure to spell trouble.

    Reply

  109. visitor says:

    Hello everyone. This is my first post here. I was referred here from Godlike Productions.
    Several have been asking, or guessing WHO is Cheney’ secret ‘Aid’. Please go to Godlike Productions, and look for a post by Mopar.
    I posted information there, and why I believe this Aid is not who people are guessing, but someone else that is very private, which may explain why the secrecy.
    God be with us, and have mercy.
    Visitor

    Reply

  110. fkay says:

    That’s why Cheney has to be impeached first.

    Reply

  111. John DE says:

    This is the same strategy the UK and France used to try to take the Suez Canal in 1956. They got Israel to invade.

    Reply

  112. TonyForesta says:

    Outstanding work Steve. I agree with every treacherous traitorous assertion made regarding Cheney and is fascist cabals in the Pentagon. However, I have to second Via above in that Bush and Rice are woven of the same oleaginous, tyrannical fascist cloth.
    Halliburtion repositioning in Dubai.
    An increase in US military fire power in the Gulf of Hurmoz.
    The same kind of hollow, unsubtantiated, unvetted, hype, and patent lies pimped prior to Iraq, now issuing dire warnings conflating Iran with al Quaida, – such as the nonesensical fiction that Shi’ Iran is backing wahabi Al Quaida, and salafist, and Sunni insurgents in Iraq.
    The table is set, the ouer dourves are served, and the main course is steaming in the kitchen ready to be served.
    The only reason and real justification for this imperialist insanity, and fascist machination is that Cheney, Bush, Rice, all the PMC’s Private Intelligence Companies, select defense contractors, and the major oil and energy oligarchs will profit obscenely from an expansion of neverendingwar by attacking Iran. Oil markets are already factoring in the security risk numbers to oil futures.
    While Admiral Fallon and other concerned generals may resist further stressing an already strained US military, any provocation by Israel against Iran would uncork a pandoras box of unknown unknowns and likely force America to resort to attack Iran preemetively or in defense of US or Israeli, or maybe even Saudi interests, and all the concommitant profiteering that would result be pure and simple icing on the imagined cakewalk.
    Kucinich is prescient and the only democrat with the courage to confront the greatest threat to America’s prosperity and security, – Dick Cheney and the fascist warmongers, profiteers, and pathological liars in the Bush government.
    Deliver us from evil.

    Reply

  113. weldon berger says:

    POA: I think there are distinct camps within the administration, but you’re right: if the administration does attack Iran, in a year or two or three we’ll be treated to the spectacle of former administration officials who could have resigned and spoken out or, as you say, gone to Congress, being lauded as noble humans for retroactively attacking the policies and behaviors that led to an attack that they could have prevented.

    Reply

  114. Glen Tomkins says:

    The Unholy Trinity
    Forget for a minute the supposed role of Cheney as a sawed-off Richelieu in getting war with Iran started. Bush will go along only if it serves some Bush interest.
    That’s the real problem. Bush needs war with Iran to get his approvals mojo back. Ditto for Olmert, and ditto, reversing the signs, of course, for Ahmedinejad. It’s a regular Confederacy of Dunces, an Unholy Trinity in which each of the three major players needs a war, irrespective of whatever threat the putative “enemy” presents. The real threat for all three is the domestic opposition, which, in all three cases, can be most effectively throttled by scaring the bejeesus out of their electorates with a war.

    Reply

  115. Glen Tomkins says:

    The Unholy Trinity
    Forget for a minute the supposed role of Cheney as a sawed-off Richelieu in getting war with Iran started. Bush will go along only if it serves some Bush interest.
    That’s the real problem. Bush needs war with Iran to get his approvals mojo back. Ditto for Olmert, and ditto, reversing the signs, of course, for Ahmedinejad. It’s a regular Confederacy of Dunces, an Unholy Trinity in which each of the three major players needs a war, irrespective of whatever threat the putative “enemy” presents. The real threat for all three is the domestic opposition, which, in all three cases, can be most effectively throttled by scaring the bejeesus out of their electorates with a war.

    Reply

  116. JonU says:

    Through the looking glass…
    We get the government we deserve.
    We get the government we earn.

    Reply

  117. Pissed Off American says:

    I have no patience for this kind of horseshit. Painting the Bush Administration as two separate camps, engaged in infighting about policy and this nation’s future course does not adequately describe the rot that is the ENTIRE Bush Administration. If the lying bitch Rice wants to rein these criminally insane bastards in, all she need do is honor the congressional subpoena she is ignoring, and come clean with Congress and the American people about the scope and extent of Bush/Cheney’s acts of treason that have been committed these last six years, particularly as it applies to Iraq and this God damned SCAM called the “Global War On Terrorism”. The same could be said of Powell. The simple truth is, if these people think that attacking Iran would be a disaster, then they could nip it in the bud with one fuckin’ press conference. The trouble is, they are WAY TOO COMPLICIT in the crimes of the last six years, and if they spill the beans, the whole steaming mass of maggots is going down with the ship. Bottom line, these assholes are just along for the ride, while Cheney steers straight for the iceberg. Too cowardly to mutiny, and too inept to swim. There isn’t preacher’s chance in hell that this ship is changing coursze

    Reply

  118. Ray II says:

    So…let me get this straight…for all intents and purposes, according to the insiders, Cheney is pretty much in the process of preparing a coup de tat to initiate conflict with Iran? If that’s not impeachable then God in heaven help us all! What the hell? The foundations of our country are being tested and we all need to pray for sanity to prevail, because in a wink of an eye the conflagration these people desire could be upon us. America, remember all those who died for this country this weekend and know that their memories, this Memorial Day 2007 are being dishonored by the likes of those who are subverting this nations principles and morals by conducting ill conceived plans of agression in order to achieve ill gotten gain. This administartion is a ugly stain on the American reputation of decency and honor and Carter has nothing to be ashamed of in calling it, the worst in history.

    Reply

  119. Richard W. Crews says:

    If we, or Israel, hit Iran, Iran should just hunker down and keep on going. Play up the illegal attack on the world stage.
    Of course, they should attack by proxy EVERYWHERE, but nowhere with their name on it. They should shut down MidEast oil, and the world economy.
    That’s what I would do as Iran.

    Reply

  120. Via says:

    You know, after thinking a bit about this, I think we are all being played. Bush, Condi and Cheney are all on the same page here. They all want armed conflict with Iran, a hot war. If Cheney instigates a third party, probably Israel, to hit Iran and Iran in turn hits us, Bush will have ‘no choice’ but to retaliate. Cheney is already the bad cop, Bush and Condi can play the heroic good cop role. Bush has now set himself up as the go to guy if there is a national emergency and has assumed control of (what is left in the states) the National Guard. Hello martial law, goodbye 2008 elections.

    Reply

  121. jummy says:

    not only this, but it’s my understanding that a rove indictment is immanent.

    Reply

  122. wisedup says:

    for this to play out Olmert will have to be deposed by nutty Netty quite soon.

    Reply

  123. dalivision says:

    43 must somehow PROVE that he is better than 41. What a way to prove his management will not require 41 from interfering with Oil, Baseball, Iraq Study Group, and now this.

    Reply

  124. owenz says:

    I don’t think Israel is dumb enough to hitch its wagons to Cheney’s sinking ship. But you never know.

    Reply

  125. GeneC says:

    section9 said:
    “You all are simply invested in the notion of the Cheney and Bush as Bogeymen to see this. This is an avoidable tragedy, but fascists, which is what the men around Ahmadhi-Nejad are, have the upper hand now.”
    Just how, may I ask, did the Iranians get the upper hand over the US?
    This is the true screwup of Bush and Cheney. World opinion is against us, our enemies can act with near impunity, and the American people do not trust this administration to handle it competently, much less know if they are telling us the truth.
    “Rice fully understands what Cheney does: this may fail because Ahmadhi-Nejad and the Revolutionary Guards hold the Whip hand. If it does, the Iranians must be allowed to make the first overt hostile act, like the Japanese before them.”
    BTW, the notion that the hardcore right in Iran will take overt military action is ludicrious. They know if they did, their nuclear facilities will get bombed. That’s the last thing they want right now. Common sense says their best tactic is to keep the US bogged down in Iraq, unpopular abroad, and divided at home, while they continue to develop a nuclear weapon.
    So even if the right thing to do in the current situation were to bomb Iran (and that’s debatable), the US cannot afford to, because the neocons have spent every ounce of credibility and political capital the US ever had, and then some, creating this fucked up situation in the first place.
    This is what happens when realism is replaced with ideology. Is it any wonder that people are concerned about Cheney’s machinations?

    Reply

  126. Mackie says:

    Steve wrote:
    “This official [the aide doing the leaking] is beating the bush and doing what Joshua Muravchik has previously suggested–which is to help establish the policy and political pathway to bombing Iran.”
    I’m really lost here. Nudging Israel to bomb Iran sounds like a secret plan. Isn’t this leaking broadcasting it? To a public that is terrified we’ll be bamboozled into fighting Iran?

    Reply

  127. Carroll says:

    I don’t care which aide in Cheney’s office is credited with this. I guarentee you this guy ( the one at the top of my personal hit list) is the one greasing the way for the plan.
    http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/969

    Reply

  128. JohnH says:

    Who come out ahead if Israel takes out Natanz and Iran takes out Dimona?
    Iran does not necessarily need to retaliate from Iranian territory. Reports last summer indicated that Hezbollah had not used its full range of missiles, notably its most powerful and sophisticated ones. Their availability could conceivably be the price Hezbollah had to pay in return for being armed by Iran. If so, Cheney is really opening Pandora’s box. Will Israel be willing to put its existence on the line for Cheney?
    Also, two points of trivia: 1) Dimona does not show on Google maps. 2) Dimona is where a large number of black Jews ended up. You can draw your own conclusions.

    Reply

  129. pauline says:

    emptywheel tells us —
    Remember this picture? Bush talking tough on Iraq while Cheney monitors his speech to make sure Bush is appropriately belligerent?
    Well, Steve Clemons reports that Cheney is not just monitoring Bush right now, he is sabotaging Bush’s Condi’s efforts to avoid a war with Iran.
    Multiple sources have reported that a senior aide on Vice President Cheney’s national security team has been meeting with policy hands of the American Enterprise Institute, one other think tank, and more than one national security consulting house and explicitly stating that Vice President Cheney does not support President Bush’s tack towards Condoleezza Rice’s diplomatic efforts and fears that the President is taking diplomacy with Iran too seriously.
    This White House official has stated to several Washington insiders that Cheney is planning to deploy an “end run strategy” around the President if he and his team lose the policy argument.
    Gosh. You think maybe this senior aide on Cheney’s national security team is John “Year of Iran” Hannah?
    The thinking on Cheney’s team is to collude with Israel, nudging Israel at some key moment in the ongoing standoff between Iran’s nuclear activities and international frustration over this to mount a small-scale conventional strike against Natanz using cruise missiles (i.e., not ballistic missiles).
    In other recent news, AIPAC has announced that it will pay all of Keith Weissman’s legal fees. Because it would be an awfully inconvenient time for someone deliberately sabotaging US policy on Iran to have to go to jail, just as the Vice President and a top security aide are busy deliberately sabotaging US policy on Iran.
    But back to Clemons.
    The zinger of this information is the admission by this Cheney aide that Cheney himself is frustrated with President Bush and believes, much like Richard Perle, that Bush is making a disastrous mistake by aligning himself with the policy course that Condoleezza Rice, Bob Gates, Michael Hayden and McConnell have sculpted.
    According to this official, Cheney believes that Bush can not be counted on to make the “right decision” when it comes to dealing with Iran and thus Cheney believes that he must tie the President’s hands.
    On Tuesday evening, i spoke with a former top national intelligence official in this Bush administration who told me that what I was investigating and planned to report on regarding Cheney and the commentary of his aide was “potentially criminal insubordination” against the President. I don’t believe that the White House would take official action against Cheney for this agenda-mongering around Washington — but I do believe that the White House must either shut Cheney and his team down and give them all garden view offices so that they can spend their days staring out their windows with not much to do or expect some to begin to think that Bush has no control over his Vice President.
    A month ago Kagro X and I pointed out that OVP really out to be considered a spy ring. How do you like the sound of that, our VP engaging in “potentially criminal insubordination” with his little spy ring.
    http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/

    Reply

  130. Carroll says:

    This is sure going to be interesting. The FBI must want this trial bad…to get the CIA and others to agree to declassify classified information. The defendants may get off depending on if the FBI broke any wiretap laws to get the information. But if they did that only means congress will have yet another “hearing” on yet another agency.
    Meanwhile though, the classified information will be out here because the trial is not closed to the public or press.
    However the defendents got the June trial put off to September…and since the dems put off Iraq till September…September is probably the magic month for another terrier attack or wag the dog war.
    Evidence Declassified in Aipac Case
    By JOSH GERSTEIN
    Staff Reporter of the Sun
    May 24, 2007
    Intelligence agencies have decided to declassify a large volume of classified information in order to move forward with the criminal prosecution of two pro- Israel lobbyists accused of trafficking in America’s national secrets.
    The decision follows a judge’s rejection last month of the government’s proposal to limit public access to the trial of the two former staffers for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Steven Rosen and Keith Weissman. Judge Thomas Ellis III concluded that the prosecution’s plan, which involved using codes and playing surveillance tapes on headphones for jurors, infringed on the constitutional rights of the defendants.
    The decision sent prosecutors and the intelligence community scrambling to assess the implications of a trial that laid bare more details about surveillance tactics and about the information allegedly disclosed by Messrs. Rosen and Weissman.
    “Late in the evening on May 22, 2007, a determination was made allowing greater public disclosure of a significant amount of classified information,” prosecutors said in a court filing yesterday afternoon.
    The prosecution said officials at the “highest levels of the affected members of the intelligence community” were involved, but the filing did not name specific agencies or officials.
    At a hearing earlier this month, Judge Ellis, who sits in Alexandria, Va., chastised the government for taking too long to resolve the questions about what secrets could be exposed at trial.
    Continued
    1 | 2 | Next »

    Reply

  131. Mackie says:

    section9 said:
    “Rice fully understands what Cheney does: this may fail because Ahmadhi-Nejad and the Revolutionary Guards hold the Whip hand.”
    What do you mean by this sentence? That she is onto Cheney’s plan? That she’s sympathetic to his plan?
    But, ultimately, I’m confused as to whether or not you think Cheney has this plan to begin with.

    Reply

  132. pauline says:

    from Wayne Madsen —
    May 24, 2007 — When Vice President Dick Cheney visited Baghdad on a “surprise” visit on May 9, he was booed by U.S. troops during an appearance before them in the Green Zone, according to our congressional sources. These incidents may explain why the Army has ordered its personnel to submit web postings, including videos, to Army censors before uploading to web sites.

    Reply

  133. Marcia says:

    Are there not a few sane Republicans with access to Bush capable of explaining to him the situation he is in if confronted with an internal rebellion in the White House? Perhaps his vanity, if nothing else could induce him to protect his own position. Without his consent Cheney has little power.

    Reply

  134. Tony says:

    WHAT IS THE NAME OF CHENEY’S AIDE YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
    PLEASE GIVE US THE NAME.

    Reply

  135. Tony says:

    WHAT IS THE NAME OF CHENEY’S AIDE YOU ARE REFERRING TO?
    GIVE US THE NAME.

    Reply

  136. Genya says:

    Section9,
    Subtract 1.
    You are clearly a Section 8.

    Reply

  137. Carroll says:

    Posted by section9 at May 24, 2007 04:42 PM
    >>>>>>>>>>
    section9?….or did you mean to put section8?

    Reply

  138. Carroll says:

    Just to give everyone further heartburn on Iran.
    Since Bush = Olmert/ incompetent
    And Cheney = Netanyahu/ wannabe president nutcase
    Backed up in the USA by AIPAC and JINSA and our corrupt Congress, including dems.
    And Back up in Israel by …”71% of Israelis want U.S. to strike Iran if talks fail”(Haaretz)
    And although Rice and new faces in the adm may be trying to tamp down the Iran attack, congress on the other hand has had a chance to back off prempting Iran and refused to.
    So where does that leave us…? who has the real power? Looks to me that pushing the “premptive attack on Iran button ultimately still rest in the Decider’s incompetent’s hands…who is swayable this way and that way by the opposing groups.

    Reply

  139. FumbDuck says:

    Save the Earth
    NUKE ISRAEL!!!

    Reply

  140. Edward Abboud says:

    Nice articlel but it imputes too much social and diplomatic intelligence and will power to W. To imply that he is at odds with Vice suggests that he has a serious, rational agenda. We know of no W agenda.

    Reply

  141. thegris says:

    Isn’t this plot of Cheney’s dangerously close to treason? Aiding an enemy regime (Iran) and inciting an attack on US forces?

    Reply

  142. Via says:

    I second the question by David N. Steve, I saw this first on Raw Story, but have you talked to the MSM about this? To any members of congress? Surely that would move impeachment up a notch in their views? Do you remember what Mickey Herskowitz, Bush’s biographer (until his aides read what he was writing and pulled it and gave it to Karen Hughes) wrote about Cheney’s advice to Bush on becoming a successful president? “Start a small war”. “Pick a country that gives you some justification and go ahead and invade”. That’s what happened in Iraq and I’ll be damned if we are going to sit here and let it happen again in Iran!!

    Reply

  143. section9 says:

    The entire problem with Clemons’ analysis is that like most liberal analysts, he places most of the blame on “Cheney and the Neocons”, while leaving out the real bad actors in this situation who don’t want Rice and Rafsanjani to succeed: Ahmadhi-Nejad and the Revolutionary Guards Corps.
    They have completely rearmed the Hezboallim and are preparing a second Rocket Offensive. Despite the Mecca Agreement, Hamas’ Missile Offensive in Gaza was done with the blessing of Tehran and its junior partner, Damascus. Meantime, Simon Tisdall, no neocon scribe for the Washington Times he, wrote in the freaking Guardian (no less) that the Guards are in league with Al Qaeda in Iraq and the Ba’ath for a summer bombing offensive in Iraq. Condi recently had to call off her trip to the Middle East when she had to come to the conclusion that the Palestinian Government she was dealing with was a shell.
    Rice understands the risks of war as well. She gets attacked by Likudnik bloggers and assorted assclowns at the Rumsfeld Amen Corner at The American Spectator and The National Review all the time. However, what she understood that other conservative Republicans (and believe me, she is one) is that in this case, the United States had to make the last, full, best effort to come to a negotiated agreement with a party that is in no apparent mood to pull back from its triumphalist impulse.
    Rice fully understands what Cheney does: this may fail because Ahmadhi-Nejad and the Revolutionary Guards hold the Whip hand. If it does, the Iranians must be allowed to make the first overt hostile act, like the Japanese before them. They will do this because they and the Syrians perceive weakness in the chorus of disagreements among Democrats and Republicans. They are on the verge of doing something dreadfully stupid when Rice and the EU are offering them a way out.
    And they will. They simply won’t be able to help themselves. You all are simply invested in the notion of the Cheney and Bush as Bogeymen to see this. This is an avoidable tragedy, but fascists, which is what the men around Ahmadhi-Nejad are, have the upper hand now.
    It will start in the Levant again, as before. Those of you who believe that it will not come do not understand the determination of the Iranian faction around Ahmadhi-Nejad to humiliate the West, settle scores with Israel, but most importantly, keep the U.S. and the Israelis from scuttling the Iranian atomic bomb program.

    Reply

  144. GW says:

    Amazing! First Cheney’s cronies draft a Presidential Security Directive in Jan 2001 that gives the VP unprecedented NSC powers, then all of Cheney’s cronies get interwoven into DOD and DOS, and tehn we go to war at the bidding to Cheney’s PNAC and AEI based on doctored intel from Cheney’s cronies. Now this?

    Reply

  145. Robert Hume says:

    Some think that the immigration bill is being pushed so that folks won’t pay attention to what is going on in Iraq/Iran. Others think the reverse. Both are insane and could lead to the end of the US as we have known it. Maybe both at the same time?

    Reply

  146. Bonethug Iranian says:

    This then, is the beginning of the end of American democracy. It isn’t like one couldn’t see it coming. Pretty sad when one thinks about what could have been.

    Reply

  147. Cloned Poster says:

    I admired Blair when he came to power, I kinda gave him a free pass in the build-up to the Iraq War, in that he would talk Bush out of extreme action. He fucked up. Cheney is CEO of Imperial Oil America, so nuking Iran is good for business.

    Reply

  148. Linda says:

    Carter is correct as was Ford posthumously.
    This may make a better movie than “All the President’s Men”–more like “Seven Days in May” or “The Manchurian Candidate” or “Dr. Strangelove.”
    It really isn’t funny at all and actually quite scary.

    Reply

  149. Carroll says:

    Here is something else to think about.
    If you had full access to all intelligence or even if you were to do a diagram on the things reported by Hersh and other creditible journalist about all the plots,intrigues and funding and playing one fraction against another in the ME..you could probably come up with something that does fit our antiquated treason definition of “aiding the enemy in wartime”.
    Because slipping aid or info under the table to an enemy group to bring about sceniros you will act on in regard to another enemy is till aiding a enemy regardless of the motivation.
    But that’s probably too complicated for congress.

    Reply

  150. Peter Princple says:

    “The White House must either shut Cheney and his team down . . . or expect some to begin to think that Bush has no control over his Vice President.”
    Gee, what would give them THAT idea?
    Fortunately, while Bush doesn’t control Cheney, Cheney doesn’t control the Pentagon any more through his fellow Sith Lord, Donald Rumfeld.
    If Gates is on board with the realist strategy — and he practicaly defines the type — then Cheney would appear to be checkmated. The Vice President’s office has no constitutional authority whatsoever over any of the cabinet departments. Sure, he can continue to plot with the AEI and tie the NSC up in knots. But he can’t start a war, not without the Dauphin’s signature. And, with luck, Condi and company are in a position to keep that from happening.

    Reply

  151. pmse57 says:

    Someone needs to confirm that Cheney was meeting with the DC Madam’s ladies so as to scandelize him out of power.

    Reply

  152. Carroll says:

    Posted by LondonYank at May 24, 2007 03:14 PM
    >>>>>>>>>>>>
    Ditto.
    But I don’t know if I am more hopeful now or not.
    Lebanon is burning again as the direct result of outside the official box shit stirring by Cheney&Neo’s,LTD.
    I don’t know if those now united against them can prevent them from setting so many covert fires that we are drawn in like it or not.
    The warneos will not quit, and you can take that to the bank.. and cannot be neutralized or desposed of within the system …because no one within the system is willing to what is necessary to neuter them.
    Operation Iran/Iraq/ME will only cease when and if someone puts a silver bullet thru their brain and wooden stake thru their heart either literally or politically.

    Reply

  153. Sandy says:

    No tvee show comes close to what is REALLY going on.
    Who would believe it?
    Apparently not enough people.
    Sad commentary.

    Reply

  154. ... says:

    good post LondonYank.. i think you summarize the situation quite well.

    Reply

  155. carsick says:

    Lordy, it’s starting to sound like an episode of 24 yet again. Of course, on that show they usually have a come to Jesus moment when they realize their hubris was unearned and they do the right thing.
    Of course that’s just a tv show.

    Reply

  156. LondonYank says:

    I’m not sure what to think. I’ve believed Cheney & Co. were determined to attack Iran for a long time. I expected it last October, and again this spring. They probably still do want to attack Iran, but the forces arrayed against them are organised and growing.
    First, China has demonstrated that it could knock out all our military navigation and communication satellites in a number of hours. Ever since January you might have noticed that admirals and generals are a lot less keen on a war. Our ships would be blind sitting ducks. Our most advanced weapons systems would be useless.
    Second, Saudi Arabia has got all stroppy and started cutting deals behind our backs in the Middle East, with China, with India and with Europe. Bush’s buddies in Saudi now say that their marriage to America is Catholic – so no divorce – but because they are Muslim they can take another, younger wife – China. 75 percent of Gulf oil exports go to Asia.
    Third, Europe has gotten real confusing for Bush. He doesn’t know any of the new players. He hates what he does know about Gordon Brown, who will replace Blair within weeks. He can’t count on anyone white to give him cover of legitmacy this time around.
    Fourth, Russia is much more powerful and agile now than it was five years ago. Five years ago Russia watched us storm into Iraq and did nothing. Russia will allow us to storm into Iran, and then they will do to us what we did to them in Afghanistan. Now that they know it was Robert Gates who suckered them into the briar patch and then financed and armed Al Qaeda to destroy the Soviet military, they will be keen to return the favour.
    Fifth, Iran has been more reasonable and very effective at diplomacy in the region and in Asia and Europe lately. That and it has the best value-for-money military on the planet (about $91 per capita), having prepared for defensive operations ever since we instigated Saddam’s invasion of Khuzestan (90 percent of Iran’s oil reserves). The proxy war in Lebanon last year was meant to prove the model for massive attacks on civilian infrastructure to destabilise response, and then combined air superiority with limited ground occupation to hold Khuzestan. It failed there and will fail in Iran. We won’t hold Khuzestan long enough or peacefully enough to get any oil out, no matter how many millions of cluster bombs we drop on the surrounding mountains.
    If the USA attacks Iran it will not only be the end of US hegemony in the world, it will probably be the end of the US as free and wealthy nation. I would expect economic collapse, dictatorship and civil war within 10 years. With the Bushies thrown off their game plan of one party rule by rigged voting machines, a politicised Justice Department and crony courts, few Republicans have the stomach for the aggressive march toward dictatorship that an open grab for power requires. Most GOP officials are inclined to skulk in the darkness and start plotting again rather than press ahead with the full PNAC plan for global domination.
    It’s too soon to know whether reason will prevail, but I have more hope than I did last year.

    Reply

  157. David N says:

    Steve:
    My questions to you are these:
    What are you doing to get this information/allegation to the media, even if only to the marginal because sane Olbermann? Are we in the small group of your bloggers the only ones to be told that our VP is a traitor?
    What are you doing to get this information to some marginally sane members of Congress, so that we can get at least one step closer to the one useful step we have been talking about for the past several years, i.e. indicting the criminal Cheney and bringing up articles of impeachment, then going into his files starting with his handing over American economic and nation security to the oil companies in the first days of the administration in 2001?
    This is no longer a matter of mere justice. It is a matter of survival. If this criminal is allowed to get away with his insanity, the death and destruction could be of historic proportions. And those who stand by and do nothing when they could have acted will be held responsible, as well.
    Is there no one in this country with both brains and balls, or do you have to pick one only?
    Steve, what is your answer?

    Reply

  158. MP says:

    Glenn writes: “Doing an end run around the President? Isn’t that called a coup?”
    Pretty much, I’d say.

    Reply

  159. ahem says:

    And this is where it ends: the Michaels Ledeen and Rubin being asked to sell Cheney’s little plan. Pardon my French, but what f*cking right does the AEI have to direct US foreign policy?
    Well, let’s hope the Suez comparison comes true, because that ended Britain as an independent foreign power.

    Reply

  160. vicki says:

    Aaaaiiiieeeeee! Big Dick is one disturbed and disturbing creature.

    Reply

  161. pauline says:

    On 9/11/01, Secretary of Transportation, Norman Mineta, was in the Presidential Emergency Operating Center with Cheney as Flight 77 approached Washington, D.C.
    On May 23, 2003 in front of the 9/11 Commission, Secretary Mineta testified:
    “During the time that the airplane was coming in to the Pentagon, there was a young man who would come in and say to the Vice President, “The plane is 50 miles out.” “The plane is 30 miles out.” And when it got down to “the plane is 10 miles out,” the young man also said to the Vice
    President, “Do the orders still stand?” And the Vice President turned and whipped his neck around and said, “Of course the orders still stand.
    Have you heard anything to the contrary?”
    Apparently no congress critter has had the brains/guts to call hunter dick in for a full and complete “under oath” testimony concerning his strange behavior/orders at the Emergency Operating Center on our nation’s worst day in history.
    And I will add this very personal story —
    “For the First Time, New York Links a Death to 9/11 Dust”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/24/nyregion/24dust.html

    Reply

  162. penalcolony says:

    The “senior aide” more or less has to be David Wurmser or John Hannah. Since you clearly know which, why not specify?

    Reply

  163. JohnH says:

    Steve, are you ready to endorse Kucinich’s resolution to impeach Cheney? If not, why not?

    Reply

  164. steve duncan says:

    Doing an end run around the President? Isn’t that called a coup?
    Extremely disturbing stuff, this deserves to get lots of play.
    Posted by Glenn at May 24, 2007 01:47 PM
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Glenn, this President attepmted to get his AG to sign off on an illegal program while he was in ICU in critical condition. It “got lots of play” as you put it. And what? Nothing. No sanctions, no charges, no censure, very little outrage by the public. The man was on his back, sick and by some accounts staring at the other side of the void (to say nothing of not even being the acting AG) and there’s Gonzales at Bush’s behest waving documents under his nose. Nothing is beyond the pale with this crew. I repeat, Bush could murder someone on camera and get pass. The victim would be labeled a lieutenant of Bin Laden before they’d bled out.

    Reply

  165. Carly says:

    MP your thoughts are NOT evil and dangerous, they are PATRIOTIC. GO FOR IT and remember Nathan Hale’s famous last words!

    Reply

  166. Glenn says:

    Doing an end run around the President? Isn’t that called a coup?
    Extremely disturbing stuff, this deserves to get lots of play.

    Reply

  167. Punchy says:

    Very nice article, Mr. Clemons.
    It’s quite eerie to see in print what I’ve long opined–that they (I actually thought it’d be Bush, not Cheney) will use Israel to start the war that we’ll be “contractually” obligated to participate in and finish. Completely bypasses Congress, who’ll nary lift a digit to dissent.
    Perhaps knowing this is the last opp to do so, they’ll go all-out and include bombings on Syria and Lebanon, too.

    Reply

  168. MP says:

    Steve…this is definitely the scariest post you’ve posted in a long time. It has engendered quite evil and dangerous thoughts in me.

    Reply

  169. Moe says:

    Didn’t the Brits – Eden – design a similar provocation via Israel (Ben Gurion) to get the Suez Canal out of Nassar’s hands? They needed an excuse to go into Suez and the Israelis provided it by an attack.

    Reply

  170. Persistence of Memory says:

    “I think Bush could be captured live on television shooting small children dead on the South Lawn and survive in office.”
    If Bush killed and ate a litter of kitties on the Ellipse there might be a drop in his approval rating…but only if Dancing With The Stars were interrupted for live coverage of the event.

    Reply

  171. zoopaloop says:

    It’s great to live in a democracy. What historical tyrant’s court is most similar to the one you describe above?
    Cheney (Halliburton) needs blood.
    Maybe you’re just trying to report what you heard, but this is wrong: “It is not that Cheney wants to bomb Iran and Bush doesn’t, it is that Cheney is saying that Bush is making a mistake and thus needs to have the choices before him narrowed.” We know this man. Cheney wants to bomb Iran. He probably wants to bomb half the USA.
    How much of what you describe is legal?

    Reply

  172. Den Valdron says:

    Conflict within the Bush administration?
    This is like cannibal serial killers vs pedophile serial killers.
    It’s hard to figure out who to root for.

    Reply

  173. MP says:

    Welcome to WWIII.
    These people are INSANE.
    I only hope Israel resists.

    Reply

  174. steve duncan says:

    All the mayhem and death would be regrettable. However, maybe launching a war with Iran would finally convince Americans this administration was populated with a crew of bloodthirsty, criminal loonies. Then again I think Bush could be captured live on television shooting small children dead on the South Lawn and survive in office. Polls notwithstanding such is the power of a cult personality.

    Reply

Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *