Environmentalists Against War
Home | Say NO! To War | Action! | Information | Media Center | Who We Are




World Tribunal on Iraq: Conclusions

May 31st, 2005 - by admin

IraqSolidaridad (www.nodo50.org/iraq) – 2005-05-31 23:09:27


BARCELONA (May 22, 2005) — The International Tribunal on Iraq, constituted in Barcelona (for members see below), joins a series of sessions that began in Brussels in March 2004 and will finish in June 2005 in Istanbul. Sessions have been held in Berlin, Stockholm, Hiroshima, Rome, New York and other cities. Before the war a session of the Permanent Tribunal of the People was held in Rome about the illegality of armed intervention in Iraq.

The facts considered by this Tribunal have their roots in the long history of colonization of the Near and Middle East and of the control of the oil production by the European nations and, more recently, by the USA. Control over oil production has become a prime factor in determining military strategies, the setting up of military bases and eventually the resources of the war.

Various justifications -such as the lack of democracy in the region and the fight against terrorism, not to mention the false accusation of the possession of weapons of mass destruction-, serve as the pretext for armed interventions. The messianic speech by President Bush and his neoconservative advisors also give us the idea that this is a conflict of civilizations, and even of religions.

Also, the so called economical, social and political reconstruction of Iraq by the occupying power that has involved the privatization of economical activities in favour of mainly USA interests, the destruction of rural agriculture in favour of exportation, the privatization of public services such as health and education, correspond to the orientation of the neoliberal global model promoted by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

The dramatic consequences of this logic are: injustice, crime, violation of people’s rights, suffering and death, as it happened before in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Columbia and in many other places in the world. This is why the war in Iraq isn’t only a criminal aggression against the people, but also the result of a global project that concerns all humanity. If the project that is being carried out in Iraq isn’t stopped, there is a real danger of it extending to other countries of the region.

The Tribunal has heard the testimonies of Iraqi citizens, men and women who have travelled purposely to Barcelona to explain to the Tribunal the present reality in Iraq (see list below). The Tribunal has underlined the courage and civil merit of these witnesses that have constituted the fundamental principle of the pronunciation of the Tribunal. They represent the most varied field of the society of their country, workers, health, education, journalism and the defence of human rights. For this reason, and because of their immediate knowledge of the reality, their testimonies are of the maximum credibility and have allowed the Tribunal the access to rigorous and true information.

And so we conclude:

1. The invasion and occupation of Iraq and the process of transition designed by the occupants was not aimed at the government of Iraq, but against the State of Iraq. To the illegality of the attack and the invasion we must add the illegality of the measures contrary to the rules of international law that ban any changes to the judiciary statutes of the invaded territory, or the usurping of the sovereignty of the occupied State, including its natural resources.

All these measures were adopted during the Provisional Authority of the Coalition, directed by Paul Bremer, with the intention of these changes becoming permanent.

2. According to international law, the occupation caused by armed conflict is a factual situation. Its existence or non-existence doesn’t depend on a formal declaration, not even on behalf of the Security Council of the United Nations.

The title of occupant derives from the real authority, because this authority constitutes the basis of the occupant’s responsibility. The occupying power and its allies apparently continue in Iraq at the request of the transitional Iraqi government. Facts show that there is no subordination of the multinational force to the government, but to the US command. The final authority, not only the military but also the civil power, and the effective control of the territory resides in the USA Government and in the thousands of advisors dependant on its embassy in Baghdad.

3. The dismantling of the productive structure of Iraq and the savage introduction of the market economy, the privatization of agriculture, industry and services and in particular the impossibility of the Iraqi people to benefit from their prime resource – oil – mean a flagrant violation of international law and the privation of the basic rights of the Iraqi people.

4. Many of the facts that have been put forward in Barcelona constitute war crimes, as defined in article 8, paragraphs1 & 2 of the statute of the International Criminal Court. They also constitute crimes against humanity as defined in article 7 of the same statute. These crimes are as much the responsibility of the occupying power as that of the individuals that commit them, allow them to happen, or aid the culprits.

5. The invasion and occupation of Iraq, against sovereignty, individuals and collectives of the Iraqi people, give full legitimacy to the resistance, which according to article 51 of the United Nations Chart expresses the right to legitimate defence, constituting the only guarantee to a free and democratic future.

6. In the same way all forms of terrorism that only prejudice the construction of this future are categorically rejected.

7. The recuperation of the full sovereignty of Iraq must first undergo the immediate removal of all the occupier’s military contingents, the dismantling of its bases and the ceasing of its repressive rule. Whilst this removal does not take place the local authorities will lack a minimum legitimacy and its political and legal decisions, particularly the implantation of a new constitution, will not be valid. Only after this withdrawal will a new plural and truly independent political power be formed. This will not be the product of formulas of designation or of elections orientated by external agents and will not be subject to trusteeship and so restricted in its attributions.

8. The setting up of guarantees of full and effective respect of human rights, as well as the demands of responsibility for all the acts committed by the occupier -including the material and moral compensation of the people that have suffered violations of their fundamental rights- is indispensable.

9. Full recuperation of political sovereignty is the first step towards the recuperation of economical sovereignty. Only a truly free government can adopt effective policies aimed at the dispensation of help, the normalization of the services, the remission of privatizations, the end of corruption and compensation for the destruction.

The Tribunal agrees to send its report to the United Nations, to the government of the occupying powers, to the Spanish Government and to the Generalitat de Catalunya, to the European Union Commission and to the person responsible for Political Security and Defence of the European Union.

And finally, the Tribunal hopes that citizens from all over the world will maintain their solidarity with the people of Iraq, their sensitization in relation with the violations of human rights and their will to fight in favour of peace.

Members of the Tribunal:
• President: François Houtart, Sociologist o and Theologist. Director of Centre Tricontinental, Lovaina.

• Mercedes García Aran, professor of Criminal Law. Barcelona University.
• Carlos Jiménez Villarejo, former Anti-corruption Prosecutor at the Spanish National Audience.
• Sharon Marie Ceci. USA Internacional Action Center member.
• Pedro Martínez Montávez. Arabist, professor emeritus of Arab and Islam at the Autonomous University of Madrid.
• María Pilar Massana Llorens, member of Aturem la Guerra (Stop the War) Barcelona, PASI-CEOSI.
• Jaume Saura, professor of International Law at the Barcelona University and President of Human Rights Institute of Catalonia.

Honour Members (not attending the Hearing):
Ahmed Ben Bella, First President of Alger.
• Ramsey Clark, Former US Attorney and President of International Action Center, EEUU.
• Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, Awarded Nobel of Peace.
• Joan Martínez Alier, Professor of Economics and Economical History. Autonomous University of Barcelona.
• Rosa Regás, Writer and director of the Spanish National Library.
• Javier Sádaba, Professor of Ethics. Autonomous University of Madrid.
• Nawal as-Saadawi. Writer.

Iraq testimonies attending the Hearing in Barcelona:
• Iman Ahmed Jamas. Journalist and translator; former director of the Occupation Watch in Baghdad and co-ordinator of the Iraqi delegation for the Tribunal.
• Yawad Mohammad M. Mahdi al-Jalisi. Director of Al-Jalisiya University-School,
• imam of Al-Khadimiya Mosque (Baghdad), Secretary General of Iraqi Foundational National Congress.
• Intisar Muhammad Araibi. Director of Pharmacy Department in Al-Yarmouk University Hospital, Baghdad.
• Muhammad Tariq Abd Allah. Executive manager of Human Rights Studies and Democracy Centre, Faluya/Baghdad.
• Abdullah Adul Hamid Mousa. Member of the Executive Board of the Oil Trade Union, Basora.
• Abid Ali Kadhim al-Mamouri. Professor of Economic International Relations. An-Nahrein University, Baghdad.
• Muhammad Yasin Muhammad. Member of the Local Council of Adamiya (Baghdad) Human Rights Committee.

The address of this page is : www.uruknet.info?p=12076

Impeachment Fever and Media Politics

May 31st, 2005 - by admin

Norman Solomon / Common Dreams – 2005-05-31 23:01:57


Impeachment Fever and Media Politics
Norman Solomon / Common Dreams

(May 31, 2005) — If you think President Bush should be impeached, it’s time to get serious. We’re facing huge obstacles — and they have nothing to do with legal standards for impeachment. This is all about media and politics.

Five months into 2005, the movement to impeach Bush is very small. And three enormous factors weigh against it:

• 1) Republicans control Congress.
• 2) Most congressional Democrats are routinely gutless.
• 3) Big media outlets shun the idea that the president might really be a war criminal.

For now, we can’t end the GOP’s majority. But we could proceed to light a fire under congressional Democrats. And during the next several weeks, it’s possible to have major impacts on news media by launching a massive educational and “agitational” campaign — spotlighting the newly leaked Downing Street Memo and explaining why its significance must be pursued as a grave constitutional issue.

The leak of the memo weeks ago, providing minutes from a high-level meeting that Prime Minister Tony Blair held with aides in July 2002, may be the strongest evidence yet that Bush is guilty of an impeachable offense. As Rep. John Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, wrote in late May:

• “First, the memo appears to directly contradict the administration’s assertions to Congress and the American people that it would exhaust all options before going to war. According to the minutes, in July 2002, the administration had already decided to go to war against Iraq.”

• “Second, a debate has raged in the United States over the last year and one half about whether the obviously flawed intelligence that falsely stated that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction was a mere ‘failure’ or the result of intentional manipulation to reach foreordained conclusions supporting the case for war. The memo appears to close the case on that issue stating that in the United States the intelligence and facts were being ‘fixed’ around the decision to go to war.”

The May 26 launch of www.AfterDowningStreet.org comes from a coalition of solid progressive groups opting to take on this issue with a step-by-step approach that recognizes the need to build a case in the arena of media and politics. The coalition is calling for a Resolution of Inquiry in the House of Representatives that would require a formal investigation by the Judiciary Committee.

“The recent release of the Downing Street Memo provides new and compelling evidence that the President of the United States has been actively engaged in a conspiracy to deceive and mislead the United States Congress and the American people about the basis for going to war against Iraq,” attorney John C. Bonifaz recently wrote to Conyers:

“If true, such conduct constitutes a High Crime under Article II, Section 4 of the United States Constitution: ‘The President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.'”

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the sole power to declare war — and the argument can be made that White House deception in the lead-up to the invasion of Iraq amounted to a criminal assault on that constitutional provision.

But “high crimes and misdemeanors” is a very general term. And history tells us that in Washington’s pivotal matrix of media and politics, crimes of war have rarely even registered on the impeachment scale.

In 1974, President Nixon avoided impeachment only by resigning soon after the Judiciary Committee, by a 27-11 vote, approved a recommendation that the full House impeach him for obstruction of justice in the Watergate scandal. Only 12 members of the committee voted to include Nixon’s illegal bombing of Cambodia — and his lies about that bombing — among the articles of impeachment.

Another war-related impeachment effort came in response to the Iran-Contra scandal. You wouldn’t have known it from media coverage or congressional debate, but the Reagan administration’s Iran-Contra maneuvers were part of a Washington-driven war that enabled the US-backed Contra guerrillas to terrorize Nicaraguan civilians, killing thousands in the process.

When Rep. Henry Gonzalez, a Democrat from Texas, pushed for impeachment of President Reagan (and, for good measure, Vice President George H. W. Bush) in 1987, he stood virtually alone on Capitol Hill.

Gonzalez was back on high moral ground the day before the first President Bush launched the Gulf War. On Jan. 16, 1991, the maverick Democrat stood on the House floor and announced he was introducing a resolution with five impeachment charges against Bush. The National Journal reported:

“Among the constitutional violations Bush committed, according to Gonzalez, were commanding a volunteer military whose ‘soldiers in the Middle East are overwhelmingly poor white, black and Mexican-American or Hispanic-American,’ in violation of the equal protection clause, and ‘bribing, intimidating and threatening’ members of the United Nations Security Council ‘to support belligerent acts against Iraq,’ in violation of the UN charter.”

In the past, attempts to impeach presidents for war crimes have sunk like a stone in the Potomac. If this time is going to be different, we need to get to work — organizing around the country — making the case for a thorough public inquiry and creating a groundswell that emerges as a powerful force from the grassroots.

Only a massive movement will be strong enough to push over the media obstacles and drag politicians into a real debate about presidential war crimes and the appropriate constitutional punishment.

Norman Solomon’s new book, War Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us to Death, comes off the press in June. For information, go to: www.WarMadeEasy.com

9/11 CitizensWatch Joins Alliance Seeking Inquiry
Into Possible Bush Administration High Crimes

9/11 CitizensWatch Joins Coalition to Support a Resolution of Inquiry into the Administration’s pre-Iraq War Deceptions and Urges Sponsors to Broaden the Examination to also include their Deceit and Misconduct Surrounding the 9/11 Attacks

Washington, DC. (May 27, 2005) — In response to the recently leaked Downing Street memo documenting that the White House was tailoring facts and intelligence to sell its Iraq war policy as early as July 2002, a coalition of citizen groups representing millions of Americans has formed to seek a formal Congressional Inquiry into possible High Crimes and Misdemeanors committed by the President and his Administration. (The presentation of a formal Resolution of Inquiry to the House Judiciary Committee is the first step toward possible impeachment of US officials.)

Based on a review of the thousands of pages of 9/1l evidence compiled in the last three and a half years, CitizensWatch concluded that the administration’s systematic deception of the American people was well underway as early as September of 2001 when they repeatedly misrepresented the facts and circumstances of the attacks.

“Any Inquiry on the Hill must broaden to examine the campaign of deceit around 9/11, Abu Grahib, and radioactive weaponry as well as the now obvious duplicity in their selling of the war on Iraq,” said, Kyle F. Hence, co- founder of CitizensWatch. “If the nation has learned anything in the past three years, it is that the Iraq invasion and occupation were in planning since the earliest days of this administration yet would have been politically impossible without the 9/11 attacks.

“It is worthwhile to isolate and document particular lies in the run-up to the war, but it is now far more critical to address the overall plan that needed a 9/11 to succeed and the pattern of deceit that ensued. The prima facie evidence for this administration’s criminal wrongdoing is currently overwhelming and a broad congressional inquiry is certainly long overdue.”

9/11 CitizensWatch maintains that the official 9/11 story as portrayed and defended in the Kean/Zelikow 9/11 Report is riddled with distortions, misrepresentations and critical omissions both regarding evidence they had on hand and that which they refused to seek.

We stand with the 9/11 families who documented the Report failure to answer most of their questions about the murders of their loved ones and held no one accountable for any aspect of the tragedy or their subsequent lies.

There is now a large body of scholarly work on these questions that a congressional inquiry could draw upon to expose the truth, seek accountability and demand justice.

• For Rawstory’s breaking story on the Citizens’ Alliance please visit:
http://rawstory.com/exclusives/alexandrovna/coalition_inquiry_downing_street _memo_526

• You’ll find the Resolution of Inquiry here in Memo to Rep. John Conyers:
http://rawstory.com/exclusives/alexandrovna/memo_bush_impeachable_offenses_5 26

• More details on the alliance supporting the Resolution of Inquiry: http://www.afterdowningstreet.org

• Representative Conyers has launched a petition drive for Americans who want to support his effort to get answers from the White House. Go to:

Please be sure to sign Rep. Conyer’s petition ( http://www.rawstory.com/aexternal/conyers_petition_downing_street_527) to accompany a letter to President Bush seeking answers to important questions regarding the Blair Memo. Later let us hope he Rep. Conyers will ask important questions of the President regarding the attacks of September 11th and the statements made in the aftermath.]

Strategies for Senseless Slaughter:

May 31st, 2005 - by admin

John Kaminski /Global Research – 2005-05-31 22:46:40


John Kaminski /Global Research

(May 27, 2005) — It happened quite by accident, as most revelations do. And it is seen by most of the world as the most revolting of the American/Israeli atrocities in the past few years, although it’s hard to prioritize that claim because of the level and frequency of barbaric acts that are committed on a regular basis by those affluent automatons who call themselves the good guys.

Yet everyone but the comatose American populace — blinded by its Orwellian media and stupefied by its demented diet of physical and mental poisons — can see it.

So permit me to spell it out for those cowardly people who say they’re living in the freest country on Earth, but absolutely refuse in their silent ignorance to see the blood they’re spilling. No country that condones deliberate torture for any reason can ever be trusted.

The first hint came in Imad Khadduri’s “A warning to car drivers” written in Arabic and posted on www.albasrah.net on May 11 (See: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KHA505A.html ). The dispatch was quickly picked up by two of the most realistic and reliable news sites on the Web, www.uruknet.info, which I try to read every day, and www.globalresearch.ca, which I try to read every week, since it offers less breaking and more analytical news. I consider these two sites essential to keeping up with the real news of the world, and highly recommend that you monitor them, too.

Khadduri recounted a scam that opens up a clear window to seeing who is perpetrating all this inexplicable violence in Iraq. Beyond the American attempt to pacify an outraged and abused nation through demonic destruction, and beyond the Iraqi attempt to resist this totalitarian takeover by a foreign conqueror, there are more than numerous acts of violence that simply can’t be understood by straightforward explanations.

I mean, when a mosque blows up and Americans blame Islamic terrorists, whether Sunni or Shiite, it makes no sense. Muslims never blow up their own houses of worship. Or when reporters sympathetic to either the Iraqi cause of freedom, or even just general principles of international justice, are suddenly assassinated and the blame is placed on often imaginary Islamic extremists whose perspective is supported by these writers, how can anyone believe that Muslims did it, even thought this is what the Zionist American press and government continue to insist.

Bombs Installed while Drivers Are Detained
So who’s doing all these demented deeds? As if we didn’t know ….

Khadduri’s report went like this:

“A few days ago, an American manned check point confiscated the driver license of a driver and told him to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license. The next day, the driver did visit the camp and he was allowed in the camp with his car. He was admitted to a room for an interrogation that lasted half an hour. At the end of the session, the American interrogator told him: ‘OK, there is nothing against you, but you do know that Iraq is now sovereign and is in charge of its own affairs. Hence, we have forwarded your papers and license to al-Kadhimia police station for processing. Therefore, go there with this clearance to reclaim your license. At the police station, ask for Lt. Hussain Mohammed, who is waiting for you now. Go there now quickly, before he leaves his shift work”. (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KHA505A.html)

The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors.

The only feasible explanation for this incident is that the car was indeed booby trapped by the Americans and intended for the al-Khadimiya Shiite district of Baghdad. The helicopter was monitoring his movement and witnessing the anticipated “hideous attack by foreign elements”.

The same scenario was repeated in Mosul, in the north of Iraq. A car was confiscated along with the driver’s license. He did follow up on the matter and finally reclaimed his car but was told to go to a police station to reclaim his license. Fortunately for him, the car broke down on the way to the police station. The inspecting car mechanic discovered that the spare tire was fully laden with explosives.”

If this were the only example of this type I heard, I might have let it pass as just a story. But it wasn’t.

A Story from Riverbend: Girl Blog from Iraq
There was also the sorry tale of the Iraqi man who saw American soldiers plant a bomb which shortly thereafter exploded, and when he said so out loud for all to hear, he was hauled away, never to be seen again.

This story was reported on arguably the most authentic and riveting source of news from Iraq, the heart-rending “Baghdad Burning: Girl Blog from Iraq,” which is compiled by someone known only as Riverbend or Iraqi Girl. Again, recommended reading.

She recounts:
“the last two weeks have been violent …. The number of explosions in Baghdad alone is frightening. There have also been several assassinations — bodies being found here and there. It’s somewhat disturbing to know that corpses are turning up in the most unexpected places. Many people will tell you its not wise to eat river fish anymore because they have been nourished on the human remains being dumped into the river. That thought alone has given me more than one sleepless night. It is almost as if Baghdad has turned into a giant graveyard.

The latest corpses were those of some Sunni and Shia clerics – several of them well-known. People are being patient and there is a general consensus that these killings are being done to provoke civil war. Also worrisome is the fact that we are hearing of people being rounded up by security forces (Iraqi) and then being found dead days later – apparently when the new Iraqi government recently decided to reinstate the death penalty, they had something else in mind.

But back to the explosions. One of the larger blasts was in an area called Ma’moun, which is a middle class area located in west Baghdad. It’s a relatively calm residential area with shops that provide the basics and a bit more. It happened in the morning, as the shops were opening up for their daily business and it occurred right in front of a butcher’s shop. Immediately after, we heard that a man living in a house in front of the blast site was hauled off by the Americans because it was said that after the bomb went off, he sniped an Iraqi National Guardsman.

I didn’t think much about the story – nothing about it stood out: an explosion and a sniper – hardly an anomaly. The interesting news started circulating a couple of days later. People from the area claim that the man was taken away not because he shot anyone, but because he knew too much about the bomb. Rumor has it that he saw an American patrol passing through the area and pausing at the bomb site minutes before the explosion. Soon after they drove away, the bomb went off and chaos ensued. He ran out of his house screaming to the neighbors and bystanders that the Americans had either planted the bomb or seen the bomb and done nothing about it. He was promptly taken away.

The bombs are mysterious. Some of them explode in the midst of National Guard and near American troops or Iraqi Police and others explode near mosques, churches, and shops or in the middle of sougs. One thing that surprises us about the news reports of these bombs is that they are inevitably linked to suicide bombers. The reality is that some of these bombs are not suicide bombs – they are car bombs that are either being remotely detonated or maybe time bombs. All we know is that the techniques differ and apparently so do the intentions. Some will tell you they are resistance. Some say Chalabi and his thugs are responsible for a number of them. Others blame Iran and the SCIRI militia Badir.

In any case, they are terrifying. If you’re close enough, the first sound is that of an earsplitting blast and the sounds that follow are of a rain of glass, shrapnel and other sharp things. Then the wails begin – the shrill mechanical wails of an occasional ambulance combined with the wail of car alarms from neighboring vehicles – and finally the wail of people trying to sort out their dead and dying from the debris.

Then there was this one
On May 13, 2005, a 64-year-old Iraqi farmer, Haj Haidar Abu Sijjad, took his tomato load in his pickup truck from Hilla to Baghdad, accompanied by Ali, his 11- year-old grandson. They were stopped at an American check point and were asked to dismount. An American soldier climbed on the back of the pickup truck, followed by another a few minutes later, and thoroughly inspected the tomato-filled plastic containers for about 10 minutes. Haj Haidar and his grandson were then allowed to proceed to Baghdad.

A minute later, his grandson told him that he saw one of the American soldiers putting a grey melon size object in the back among the tomato containers. The Haj immediately slammed on the brakes and stopped the car at the side of the road, at a relatively far distance from the check point. He found a time bomb with the clock ticking tucked among his tomatoes. He immediately recognized it, as he was an ex-army soldier. Panicking, he grabbed his grandson and ran away from the car. Then, realizing that the car was his only means of work, he went back, took the bomb and carried it in fear. He threw it in a deep ditch by the side of the road that was dug by Iraqi soldiers in preparation for the war, two years ago.

Upon returning from Baghdad, he found out that the bomb had indeed exploded, killing three sheep and injuring their shepherd in his head. He thanked God for giving him the courage to go back and remove the bomb, and for the luck in that the American soldiers did not notice his sudden stop at a distance and his getting rid of the bomb.

“They intended it to explode in Baghdad and claim that it is the work of the ‘terrorists’ or ‘insurgents’ or who call themselves the ‘Resistance’.

“I decided to expose them and asked your reporter to take me to Baghdad to tell you the story. They are to be exposed as they now want to sow strife in Iraq and taint the Resistance after failing to defeat it militarily.

“Do not forget to mention my name. I fear nobody but God, as I am a follower of Muqtada al-Sadir.” (http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com/ )

Terrorism’s Godfather: Donald Rumsfeld
The background and admission of guilt for such satanic shenanigans was clearly outlined on globalresearch.ca. “The Provocateur State: Is the CIA Behind the Iraqi ‘Insurgents’ — and Global Terrorism” by Frank Morales clearly demonstrates how Donald Rumsfeld said he was going to do exactly what these three sorry episodes show he actually did.

Morales writes:
Back in 2002, following the trauma of 9-11, Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld predicted there would be more terrorist attacks against the American people and civilization at large. How could he be so sure of that? Perhaps because these attacks would be instigated on the order of the Honorable Mr. Rumsfeld.

According to Los Angeles Times military analyst William Arkin, writing on Oct. 27, 2002, Rumsfeld set out to create a secret army, “a super-Intelligence Support Activity” network that would “bring together CIA and military covert action, information warfare, intelligence, and cover and deception,” to stir the pot of spiraling global violence. (http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR505A.html)

We never got the full story on those ghastly beheadings of Nick Berg and others. Nor have we ever understood who killed the American mercenaries in Fallujah that eventually precipitated one of the great slaughters in history. Nor have we ever been able to discern if Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is actually a real person or just another bin Ladenesque boogeyman. Nor if the al-Qaeda website which claims responsibility for various atrocities is not really run by the CIA.

Provoking this type of violence also further conceals the sinister genocide the Israelis continue to perpetrate on the hapless Palestinians, which is exactly its point, as is the entire Iraq invasion and destruction, and as was the inside job mass murder on 9/11 in New York City. The purpose of all these despicable acts is to conceal what the Israelis and the Americans have been doing all along to the entire Arab world, namely enslaving and destroying it.

‘No Arab Terror Threat’
There is not now nor ever was an Arab terror threat. That was all invented by Rothschild, Rockefeller, Kissinger, Brzezinski, Bush, Cheney, Sharon, Zakheim, Perle, Wolfowitz, Feith, Abrams and Warren Buffett. These people are all traitors to not only their countries but to humanity in general, and should all be slammed and RICOed into Guantanamo immediately.

And so should the government officials, media lackeys, and ordinary citizens who, by their complicity or their ignorance, support them.

The main point in understanding these deliberate provocations to prevent peace is to understand how the American capitalist system, now hijacked by billionaires with no trace of conscience, thrives on war and profits from the misery of others.

The neocon murder menace has been for months ratcheting up the hyperbole about why we need to invade Iran – which some predict will happen in June – and just this week, rumors of troop movements in the Caribbean and lockdowns at Florida military bases appear to augur an imminent invasion of oil-producing Venezuela.

The overall plan is to create hell on Earth, and we are succeeding. By our silent complicity and cowardly reluctance to oppose and stop this homicidal behavior in the name of profit, we are all accessories to mass murder and the destruction of human society, not to even mention the extinction of individual human freedom and the God-given right to be safe and secure in the homes of our choice.

So now that you know, what are you going to do about it? You know if you do nothing, these same things will one day happen to you.

John Kaminski is a writer whose Internet essays are seen on hundreds of websites around the world. These stories have been compiled into two anthologies, “America’s Autopsy Report” and “The Perfect Enemy.” In addition, he has written “The Day America Died: Why You Shouldn’t Believe the Official Story of What Happened on September 11, 2001,” a booklet written for those who still believe the government’s cynical lies about that tragic day. All three books are available at http://www.johnkaminski.com/

Related Global Research Articles:

• “Combat Terrorism” by Causing It,” by Imad Khaddur, 16 May 2005 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KHA505A.html

• ”The Provocateur State: Is the CIA Behind the Iraqi “Insurgents” — and Global Terrorism?” by Frank Morales 12 May 2005 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MOR505A.html

• ”The New US Sponsored Gladio: Sword Play: Attacking Civilians to Justify “Greater Security,” by Chris Floyd, 20 February 2005 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/FLO502B.html

• NATO’s secret armies linked to terrorism? by Daniele Ganser, 17 December 2004 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GAN412A.html

• U.S. troops killing journalists, 20 May 2005, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/WOR505A.html

• Media Disinformation and the Nature of the Iraqi Resistance by Ghali Hassan, 24 May 2005, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/HAS505C.html

• The Crushing of Fallujah by James Petras, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/PET411A.html

• On Executions by “Terrorist Insurgents” and other Propaganda Operations by Larry Chin, 21 November 2004 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHI411C.html

• Who is Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi? by Michel Chossudovsky, 11 June 2004, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO405B.html

• Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Syria: More Black Propaganda from the Bush Lie Factory by Kurt Nimmo, 19 May 2005 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/NIM505A.html

• Psycho-Wars The Role of US Agents Provocateurs in Iraq by William Bowles, 28 October 2004, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BOW410B.html

• Could N. Berg’s execution be fake? by Pater Havlasa 16 May 2004 http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MAV405A.html

• The Mysterious Death of Marla Ruzicka: The US Military has Detailed Statistics on Civilian Casualties by Michel Chossudovsky, 24 April 2005 : http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO504C.html

• My Truth by Giuliana Sgrena, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/SGR504A.html

• Bush administration clears US troops in slaying of Calipari and wounding of Sgrena by Wayne Madsen, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/MAD503A.html

• Giuliana Sgrena Shooting: ‘Trigger-Happy’ Troops or Attempted Assassination? by Ritt Goldstein, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/GOL503A.html

• Assassination of Reuters Cameraman, who uncovered evidence of Mass US Casualties in Iraq, Recipe for Terror by Felicity Arbuthnot http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ARB311A.html

• Who was behind the Attack on the Red Cross in Baghdad? by Michel Chossudovsky, http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO310A.html

• Killing the “Unembedded Truth” by Michel Chossudovsky http://globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO304B.html

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.
The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca

© Copyright belongs to the author 2005.
Posted in accordance with Title 17, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.

US Officials Reject AI Report on Abuse

May 30th, 2005 - by admin

BBC / Fox News / Philadelphia Inquirer – 2005-05-30 22:55:09


US General Rejects Amnesty Report
BBC News Online

(May 30, 2005) — The human rights group last week described the US detention camp in Cuba as “the gulag of our time”. But US Gen Richard Myers said the US military treated detainees there humanely.

The Guantanamo Bay camp has been the focus of protests in the Muslim world, after allegations that guards had been disrespectful towards the Koran.

Speaking on the US television network Fox News, Gen Myers said the camp was “essentially a model facility”. He said 1,300 Korans had been handed out to detainees in 13 different languages and that prison staff had served up “the proper Muslim-approved food”.

“I think I’d ask them to go look up the definition of gulag as commonly understood,” he said of Amnesty’s report.

Guantanamo Bay has received much attention recently as the result of a Newsweek report this month which said US guards had flushed a Koran down a toilet.

Newsweek has retracted its story, which sparked violent anti-US protests in Afghanistan, as well as demonstrations in Pakistan and Indonesia. However, the US military has admitted to five incidents in which the Koran was mishandled by staff at the camp.

Gen Myers said the prisoners at Guantanamo were dangerous and the US was doing its best. “How do you handle people who… who aren’t part of a nation-state effort, that are picked up on the battlefield… that if you release them, or if you let them go back to their home countries, that would turn right around and try to slit our throats, our children’s throats?” he said. “The president said we’ll treat people humanely and in accordance with the Geneva Convention. We’re doing that.”

He said the International Committee of the Red Cross had had access to Guantanamo “from the day we opened the gates. I mean essentially, they’ve (ICRC) been there the whole time. And we get good marks for the way we take care of people,” he added.

Cheney Offended by Gitmo Criticism
Fox News

WASHINGTON (May 30, 2005) — Vice President Dick Cheney says he’s offended by a human rights group’s report criticizing conditions at the prison camp for terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay.

The report Amnesty International released last week said prisoners at the US Navy base in Cuba had been mistreated and called for the prison to be shut down. Cheney derided the London-based group in an interview set to be broadcast Monday night on “Larry King Live.”

“Frankly, I was offended by it,” Cheney said in the videotaped interview. “For Amnesty International to suggest that somehow the United States is a violator of human rights, I frankly just don’t take them seriously.” Cheney is the latest Bush administration official to object to the report. On Sunday, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Richard Myers called the Amnesty International report “absolutely irresponsible.”

Washington’s defense of its detention and interrogation practices comes after weeks of international criticism and violent protests by Muslims outraged at reports — which the Pentagon says are false — that an interrogator at Guantanamo had flushed pages of the Quran down a toilet.

Cheney said detainees at Guantanamo “have been well treated, treated humanely and decently….. Occasionally there are allegations of mistreatment,” Cheney said. “But if you trace those back, in nearly every case, it turns out to come from somebody who had been inside and released to their home country and now are peddling lies about how they were treated.”

Some of the scores of prisoners who have been released from Guantanamo have said they were mistreated, while others have said they were not. Other allegations have surfaced in FBI reports and transcripts of review hearings the military held for the prisoners.

Pentagon officials say they have substantiated five cases where copies of the Quran, the Muslim holy book, were mistreated, although the military has refused to offer details other than to say none was ever flushed down a toilet.

© Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2005 ComStock, Inc.
Copyright 2005 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved

Posted in accordance with Section 107, Title 17, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.

Rice Rejects Calls for Inquiry into
Guantanamo Prison Abuse

Warren P. Strobel / Inquirer

SAN FRANCISCO (May 29, 2005) — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, in an interview, brushed off growing calls for an independent investigation of conditions at the Guantanamo Bay detention center and labeled as “absurd” a new Amnesty International report equating the facility with Soviet-era gulags.

She said an outside investigation of the facility at the U.S. naval base in Cuba was not necessary.

“The United States is as open a society as you will find,” she said, and the administration is being held accountable “by a free press, by a Congress that is a separate and coequal branch of government, and by its own expectations of what is right.”

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, a close Bush ally, last week demanded an investigation of allegations that U.S. interrogators abused the Koran, the Muslim holy book, at Guantanamo Bay. The Pentagon is investigating five instances when the Koran may have been mishandled, but officials say they have found no evidence to support the incendiary charge that U.S. personnel flushed the holy book down a toilet.

Another U.S. ally, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, expressed anger over new reports of how detainees had died while American forces were interrogating them in Afghanistan.

Amnesty’s report also said that despite “near-universal outrage” over treatment of detainees, “neither the U.S. administration nor the U.S. Congress has called for a full and independent investigation.”

Rice, a Soviet scholar by training, seemed particularly indignant at Amnesty’s characterization of Guantanamo Bay as “the gulag of our times,” an allusion to Soviet prison camps under Joseph Stalin.

While the human-rights group has done important work around the world, “this is unfortunate and sad,” she said. At another point in the interview, she said: “I think it’s absurd language.”

“The United States of America is one of the strongest defenders of human rights around the world. We’ve fought hard and worked hard even in the circumstances of a new kind of war [on terrorism] to treat people humanely,” Rice said.

While acknowledging that “sometimes bad things happen,” Rice argued that the charges of Koran abuse and other violations should be put in context.

American personnel at Guantanamo Bay have shown great respect for detainees’ religion, for example providing them with prayer mats and arrows pointing to Mecca, the direction that Muslims turn to pray, she said.

She also expressed concern that American forces would be tarred unfairly by the actions of a few.

“A lot of the men and women in uniform, who people sometimes by association look at in the context of [abuses at the Iraqi prison] Abu Ghraib, have liberated 50 million people by their own blood and sacrifice over the last 31/2 years,” she said.

Rice spoke late Thursday as she flew across the country from Washington in a small jet to take a rare vacation in California.

She gave a speech Friday in San Francisco at the Commonwealth Club of California, outlining Bush’s second-term campaign to expand democracy around the world.

She was interrupted when two audience members, clad in black hoods and capes reminiscent of the photographs of detainees at Abu Ghraib, stood in silent protest. They and two others were thrown out of San Francisco’s Davies Symphony Hall, chanting, “Stop the torture. Stop the killing. U.S. out of Iraq.”

Rice attempted to turn the interruption to her advantage. Freedom is coming to Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, and other Muslim societies, she said, and the audience applauded.

“They, too, will be able to speak their minds,” Rice said. “What a wonderful thing democracy is.”

In the interview, Rice, who had just come from Bush’s White House meeting with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, indicated that she was intensely focused on Israel’s planned withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

The withdrawal is a huge opportunity for the Palestinians to begin building their own state, the secretary of state said. But she also expressed worry about how much Abbas and others had to accomplish before the scheduled beginning of Israel’s disengagement in August.

“When we talk about a successful withdrawal from Gaza, we obviously mean that the Israelis are able to leave in conditions that are peaceful,” she said. “But we also mean that the Palestinians are left with governing structures… that then become the foundation for a broader Palestinian state.

“It’s a lot to try and do in several months, but everybody seems very dedicated.”

© 2005 Philadelphia Inquirer and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.

Posted in accordance with Title 17, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposs.

Iraq Ablaze

May 30th, 2005 - by admin

Paul Rogers / Open Democracy – 2005-05-30 22:41:25


(May 26, 2005) — The first three weeks of May was one of the worst periods for violence since the Iraq war began over two years ago; and the pattern has continued into the fourth week. By 25 May, sixty United States soldiers had been killed — higher than any of the monthly losses from February to April, even though (as earlier columns in this series have outlined) US troops are less involved in patrols these days and more involved in training Iraqi security forces.

US military injuries have been particularly high — in the six-week period to 17 May, nearly 850 were injured, 244 of them serious. Iraqi casualties have been much higher, in the many hundreds; they include fifty people killed on 23 May alone. The fledgling Iraqi police and army are still the main targets.

Despite the evidence of these figures, there are still claims that the insurgency is being brought under control. George W Bush this week repeated his claim that the recent upsurge in violence in Iraq is simply a measure of the desperation of the insurgents as they fail to make progress. In this strange “inside-out” world, defeats for the Iraqi security forces become victories and the fact that United States military operations stir up a vigorous insurgent response is a measure of insurgent weakness not strength.

The arguments for such optimism include reports that the Jordanian militant and al-Qaida associate, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was wounded in combat. Whatever the truth of this claim, there are four indicators in Iraq suggesting disturbing trends that neither support the extraordinary perspective of George W Bush nor figure prominently in the western media.

No Shortage of Recruits in Iraq
The first, briefly mentioned in the news media, is the assassination of Major General Wael Rubaye, a senior Iraqi security official. The background to this incident was remarkable. In its efforts to control the insurgency, Iraq’s ministry of national security recently decided to establish a special operations room to coordinate the counter-insurgency campaign across the country. General Rubaye was commander-in-chief of this core operation, and his personal security was clearly paramount: yet within days it was breached and he was assassinated.

The second indicator is the rapid response of Britain’s ministry of defence (MoD) to an urgent operational requirement (UOR) from regional commanders in Iraq for higher levels of protection for British troops serving in southeast Iraq, around Basra. The additional equipment includes 3,300 sets of improved body armour, helmets and impact protection goggles. According to Defense News (16 May 2005):

“Commanders of Operation Telic, Britain’s mission in Iraq, told the MoD at the end of 2004 that drivers and troops providing top cover while travelling in vehicles are increasingly at risk of attack while on patrol in the south east sector of Iraq, and requested a package of protection improvements.”

The key phrase here is “increasingly at risk of attack”. The southeast of Iraq has been widely represented as being second only to the Kurdish northeast in terms of improving security; yet evidently, whatever has been said in public, the reality is an urgent need for increased troop security in a supposedly peaceful region.

The third indicator is the continuing problem of securing oil exports. The problems facing the northern export pipeline are just one example. This 480-kilometre pipeline runs from Kirkuk to the Ceyhan oil terminal in neighbouring Turkey. It used to have a capacity of 800,000 barrels of oil a day (around a quarter of Iraq’s total export potential).

Today, a 1,500-strong Iraqi security force is dedicated solely to ensuring the integrity of this one pipeline, but it has simply been unable to do so. In April, a bomb killed twelve guards, including the head of the protection team; on 13 May the main pumping station was attacked. Continual assaults have reduced oil transport to no more than 100,000 barrels a day, from one of the key oil export routes for the entire Iraqi oil industry. (IWPR, Iraq Crisis Report 126, 24 May 2005).

The fourth indicator, of which this pipeline problem forms just one part, is the slow pace of reconstruction caused largely by the unremitting insurgency. For the third year running, electricity supplies in the coming hot season will be wholly inadequate to meet the needs of ordinary Iraqis. Much of the $21 billion currently allocated to the programme is being diverted into security in the face of persistent attacks on contractors. Theresa Shope of the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office estimates that 295 security contractors have been killed on US projects alone (“Violence in Iraq Cripples $21-Bln Rebuilding Effort”, Reuters, 21 May 2005).

A recent example is the attempt to transport a large turbine and 400 tonnes of equipment to Kirkuk in order to improve generating capacity before the summer heat, which was postponed until September as the route has been declared unsafe. It is significant that Iraqi government officials are not even prepared to allow foreign journalists to visit projects that have been successfully completed, since these are likely to be attacked by insurgents as soon as they are publicised.

No Plans to Leave Iraq
A new report by the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) – Strategic Survey 2004-05 — draws a conclusion that echoes recent columns in this series: that Iraq is becoming a magnet for paramilitaries from across the region:

“From al-Qaida’s point of view, Bush’s Iraq policies have arguably produced a confluence of propitious circumstances: a strategically bogged down America, hated by much of the Islamic world, and regarded warily even by its allies”.

The IISS survey says that it will take at least five years before Iraqi forces can impose law and order on their own. This implies that there might then be a United States military withdrawal from the country, a suggestion thrown into doubt by further evidence that permanent US bases across Iraq are being planned (see Michael Howard, “US military to build four giant new bases in Iraq,” Guardian, 23 May 2005). These confirm reports dating back to the immediate post-Saddam period (see “Permanent occupation?”, 24 April 2003) that the United States was planning to have four major bases in the country.

The first of these will be close to Baghdad, but the other sites confirm the importance of Iraq’s oil resources to the US military posture; the second will be in the oil-rich Kurdish north, the third at Tallil near the even larger southern oilfields, and the fourth is expected to be at al-Asad in the west, where huge, untapped new oil reserves are believed to lie.

In early April 2003, two weeks after the start of the Iraq war, a column in this series made the ostensibly rash prediction that this was the start of a conflict lasting potentially three decades (“A thirty-year war”, 4 April 2003). Since the US forces were then closing in on Baghdad and the Saddam Hussein regime was nearing collapse, it seemed an outrageous conclusion; but even then, the war was revealing two unexpected trends: a level of irregular opposition that was causing US forces significant problems, and the lack of any great welcome for the presumed liberators.

That article concluded:
“Gulf oil will be the dominant energy source for the world for upwards of thirty years. If the US neo-conservatives establish a paradigm of clear-cut western control of the region, with Iraq at its centre, then the stage is set for a conflict that lasts just as long . Whether this occurs depends in turn on a key variable: the endurance and success of the Bush administration’s conception of international security, the essential requirement for a New American Century. If this conception does succeed, a thirty-year war is in prospect. If, by contrast, a saner approach to international security develops, the beginnings of a peaceful order could be shaped. What happens in Iraq in the next few months may determine which route is taken.”

Over two years later, it is evident which route has been taken. United States forces have lost over 1,600 killed and 11,000 seriously injured; the Iraqis have lost close to 30,000 killed and tens of thousands injured; yet the war goes on, and on. At particular times there may appear to be short-term gains for one side or the other, but the reality is that this is a deeply embedded and long-term conflict.

Beyond the immediate sequences of events, it has to be remembered that the Iraq war forms just one part of a much bigger picture: control of the world’s key energy resource. Until there is a fundamental rethink about the security of Gulf oil supplies, that war will continue. The re-election of George W Bush in November 2004 means that such a rethink is highly unlikely. The world faces the grim prospect of endless war in one of the world’s most volatile regions.

Posted in accordance with Title 17, US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.

ACTION ALERT Memorial Day Action

May 30th, 2005 - by admin

The People’s Email Network – 2005-05-30 18:19:14


On this memorial day we honor those who sacrificed their lives for our country. And just as we were last year on this day, we are still engaged in an endless occupation of attrition in Iraq with not even an exit plan. For those who gave their lives with honor, we owe it to them to get to the bottom of why they were sent there in the first place.

According to the revelations in a recently disclosed top level Top Secret British Memo, president Bush had decided no later than July, 2002, to attack Iraq and that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy”.

There was no imminent threat, only an imminent deceit. Won’t you tell your members of Congress to demand an honorable investigation?


A resolution of Inquiry has been proposed as follows:

Whereas considerable evidence has emerged that George W. Bush, President of the United States,

• has engaged in a conspiracy to deceive and mislead the United States Congress and the American people as to the basis for taking the nation into war against Iraq,

• that George W. Bush, President of the United States, has manipulated intelligence so as to allege falsely a national security threat posed to the United States by Iraq, and that George W. Bush, President of the United States,

• has committed a felony by submitting a false report to the United States Congress on the reasons for launching a first-strike invasion of Iraq: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary is directed to investigate and report to the House of Representatives whether sufficient grounds exist to impeach George W. Bush, President of the United States. Upon completion of such investigation, that Committee shall report thereto, including, if the Committee so determines, articles of impeachment.

Just a few simple words from you mean more than any form letter can. Who in Congress has the integrity to demand the truth? Who among us cares about our country enough to DEMAND AN INVESTIGATION wherever it may lead? This one click form will send your personal message to all our members of Congress at once.


Please forward this message to everyone you know and post it everywhere you can.

Or if you’d rather not hear from us anymore, just email to off_d_list@yahoo.com indicating same.

Why Isn’t Bush in the Dock?

May 30th, 2005 - by admin

Paul Craig Roberts / www.LewRockwell.com – 2005-05-30 18:13:13


(May 17, 2005) — George W. Bush and his gang of neocon warmongers have destroyed America’s reputation. It is likely to stay destroyed, because at this point the only way to restore America’s reputation would be to impeach and convict President Bush for intentionally deceiving Congress and the American people in order to start a war of aggression against a country that posed no threat to the US. America can redeem itself only by holding Bush accountable.

As intent as Republicans were to impeach President Clinton for lying about a sexual affair, they have a blind eye for President Bush’s far more serious lies. Bush’s lies have caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people, injured and maimed tens of thousands more, devastated a country, destroyed America’s reputation, caused one billion Muslims to hate America, ruined our alliances with Europe, created a police state at home, and squandered $300 billion dollars and counting.

America’s reputation is so damaged that not even our puppets can stand the heat. Anti-American riots, which have left Afghan cities and towns in flames and hospitals overflowing with casualties, have forced Bush’s Afghan puppet, “president” Hamid Karzai, to assert his independence from his US overlords.

In a belated act of sovereignty, Karzai asserted authority over heavy-handed US troops whose brutal and stupid ways sparked the devastating riots. Karzai demanded control of US military activities in Afghanistan and called for the return of the Afghan detainees who are being held at the US prison in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.

Abundant evidence now exists in the public domain to convict George W. Bush of the crime of the century. The secret British government memo (dated July 23, 2002), leaked to the Sunday Times (May 1, 2005), reports that Bush wanted:

“to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. . . .

But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. . . .

The [UK] Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorization. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult.”

This memo is the mother of all smoking guns.

Why isn’t Bush in the dock?

Has American democracy failed at home?

Dr. Roberts is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute . He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal, former contributing editor for National Review, and a former assistant secretary of the US Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions .

The Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) at www.globalresearch.ca. Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Centre for Research on Globalization.

© Copyright belongs to the author 2005.

Posted in accordance with Title 17 US Code, for noncommercial, educational purposes.

Memorial Day ACTION

May 30th, 2005 - by admin

The People’s Email Network – 2005-05-30 18:12:35


On this memorial day we honor those who sacrificed their lives for our country. And just as we were last year on this day, we are still engaged in an endless occupation of attrition in Iraq with not even an exit plan. For those who gave their lives with honor, we owe it to them to get to the bottom of why they were sent there in the first place.

According to the revelations in a recently disclosed top level Top Secret British Memo, president Bush had decided no later than July, 2002, to attack Iraq and that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy”.

There was no imminent threat, only an imminent deceit. Won’t you tell your members of Congress to demand an honorable investigation?


A resolution of Inquiry has been proposed as follows:

Whereas considerable evidence has emerged that George W. Bush, President of the United States, has
• engaged in a conspiracy to deceive and mislead the United States Congress and the American people as to the basis for taking the nation into war against Iraq,

• that George W. Bush, President of the United States, has manipulated intelligence so as to allege falsely a national security threat posed to the United States by Iraq, and

• that George W. Bush, President of the United States, has committed a felony by submitting a false report to the United States Congress on the reasons for launching a first-strike invasion of Iraq: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary is directed to investigate and report to the House of Representatives whether sufficient grounds exist to impeach George W. Bush, President of the United States. Upon completion of such investigation, that Committee shall report thereto, including, if the Committee so determines, articles of impeachment.

Just a few simple words from you mean more than any form letter can. Who in Congress has the integrity to demand the truth? Who among us cares about our country enough to DEMAND AN INVESTIGATION wherever it may lead? This one click form will send your personal message to all our members of Congress at once.


Please forward this message to everyone you know and post it everywhere you can.

Or if you’d rather not hear from us anymore, just email to off_d_list@yahoo.com indicating same.

American Militarism: Is The USA Is Addicted To War?

May 29th, 2005 - by admin

Evan Augustine Peterson III, J.D. / OrbStandard – 2005-05-29 20:53:23


American Militarism: Is The USA Is Addicted To War?
Evan Augustine Peterson III, J.D. / OrbStandard

First Consider The Evidence, Then Draw Your Own Conclusions
Let us consider the possibility that the USA has become addicted, in an economic sense, to war. While the evidence offered below is by no means exhaustive, it is directly relevant and highly probative. Therefore, the reader should consider ALL of the evidence in Exhibits A through D before judging whether or not a prima facie case has been made that America is economically addicted to war.

US Military Budget Will Equal Rest Of World’s Combined “Within 12 Months.”

A new study by the PriceWaterhouseCooper corporate-finance group concluded that the USA’s military “defense” budget:
• (A) reached $417.4 billion in 2003;
• (B) equaled nearly half – 46% – of the rest of world’s (“ROW”) combined military expenditures in 2003; and
• (C) is growing so fast that it will equal the ROW combined “within 12 months.” [1]

Hence, the American military-industrial complex is poised to monopolize the global armaments industry. And yet the War Party’s leaders and the Pentagon’s brass deem these astronomical expenditures so inadequate that they’re requesting considerably larger expenditures to sustain – or expand — their romanesque Pax Americana Imperium. [2]

Americans should be asking themselves WHY they’re being advised that they cannot feel safe after they’ve made grossly disproportionate investments, by global standards, in what is by far the world’s largest military? What do these exorbitantly expensive forces exist to do? Could it be that war’s tangible rewards are so much greater for militarists than they are for the average citizen that the militarists are exaggerating the need for a “Global War On Terror” merely to justify their empire?

The Far-Flung Global Empire Of American Militarism

What’s all that money buying, aside from endless overkill through the defense contractors’ cornucopia of hi-tech weaponry? It’s buying a far-flung empire of 1,700 bases upon which the sun never sets!

Unbeknownst to most Americans, the Department of Defense (“DOD”) currently lists 725 official US military bases outside of the country, and another 969 inside the 50 states (not to mention numerous secret bases).

According to UCSD Emeritus Professor of International Relations Chalmers Johnson, this vast military empire constitutes proof that the “Unites States prefers to deal with other nations through the use or the threat of force rather than through negotiations, commerce, or cultural interaction.” [3]

Dr. Johnson correctly concludes that American power has shifted from the people to the Pentagon with such dramatic finality that “a revolution would be required to bring the Pentagon back under democratic control.”

Eight factors have caused this anti-democratic power shift:

• the culture of American ultranationalist militarism is deeply entrenched;

• the enormous military budget has been used for gross over investment in offensive — not defensive — war making capabilities under the pretext of “national security”;

• the worldwide archipelago of military bases is being misused to expand the neocolonialist Pax Americana Imperium;

• Byzantine layers of bureaucracy and secrecy inside the government-military-industrial complex allow it to perpetrate illegalities and evade public scrutiny with impunity;

• the DOD commands a large private army of mercenaries to conduct secret black-ops actions that remain ethically and legally unaccountable;

• the DOD has successfully manipulated “national-security crises” as a pretext for centralizing the independent intelligence services under its propaganda-spewing control;

• the State Department’s statesmen have been replaced by career soldiers, oil barons, and arms barons, who think the militarization of US foreign policy is desirable;

• the federal government’s lax ethical code unwisely permits extremely close ties between high-level politicians and arms-industry executives. [4]

The Carlyle Group, The Bush Family, The War Party, And World Leaders

For at least the last twelve years, George W. Bush and George H.W. Bush have been engaging in war-profiteering through the CARLYLE GROUP (“CG”). CG is a consortium of wealthy conservatives who operate worldwide as a merchant banking firm. CG is also a major player in the defense and telecommunications industries.

CG has been averaging a whopping 34% return for its investors over the past 15 years, and its current estimated worth is $18 billion. Largely through war-profiteering, CG’s worth soared from $12 billion to $18 billion between 2000 and 2005.

So who’s involved in the Carlyle Group? Among many others:

• former President George H.W. Bush (CG’s adviser from 1993 to October 2003, and current investor);

• Bush I Secretary of State James Baker (CG’s $180 million partner);

• General Colin Powell before he was Bush II’s SOS;

• Reagan Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci (CG’s chairman);

• Bush I National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft;

• former conservative British Prime Minister John Major (head of CG’s European operations); and

• the former right-wing presidents of the Philippines and South Korea.

In the typical revolving-door style that has made postmodern Washington an ethics-free zone, the Carlyle Group is managed and staffed by former Republican employees of the CIA, the State Department, and the DOD. The Saudi royal family also is — and the Bin Laden family recently was — a major investor in CG. Additionally, many prominent international bankers are CG investors.

But wait! What about George W. Bush? He was a director in the Carlyle Group’s subsidiary, Caterair, before he managed the Texas Rangers baseball team. Then, as Governor of Texas, he induced the board of the Texas teachers’ pension fund — the members of which he appointed — to invest $100 million in CG.

Finally, GWB stands to inherit a multimillion dollar portion of whatever his father reaps through his consultations with, and investments in, CG. That might explain why GWB was so adamant both that his illegal elective war against Iraq MUST commence in March 2003, and that the estate tax MUST be repealed (which his party did in April 2005). Now when Poppy Bush dies, he can receive 100% of that blood-soaked windfall inheritance. [5]

The War-Profiteering Leviathans Bechtel And Halliburton

BECHTEL is a gargantuan multinational construction firm. The US-based Bechtel’s war-profiteering activities are so prodigious that they’re the stuff of legends. Knowledgeable defense experts have characterized Bechtel as “more powerful than the US Army.”

After 9/11, George Schultz, the Bechtel CEO and former Secretary of State, lobbied vigorously for the invasion of Iraq. The Bush administration rewarded Schultz by granting Bechtel exclusive no-bid, gold-plated contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq, before it reduced Iraq’s infrastructure to rubble during its “shock and awe” blitzkrieg.

These Iraq War contracts enabled Bechtel to reap record profits of $17 billion in 2003, and $17.4 billion in 2004.

The firm was founded by the San Francisco-based Bechtel family, who are old friends with the Saudi-based Bin Laden family. These two families have worked together on many construction projects in the Mideast. Indeed, they’re currently collaborating on a $20 billion deal with the Saudi government to excavate two new ports.

Furthermore, the Bin Laden family owns a $10 million stake in Bechtel Corporation’s investment subsidiary, The Fremont Group. Of course, the Bin Laden’s are also old friends with the Bush family. It’s a small world, after all. [6]

HALLIBURTON has vaulted to the forefront as the USA’s premier — and most corrupt — war profiteer. Before revolving-door gamesman Dick Cheney became Bush II’s running mate in 2000, he was receiving a multimillion dollar salary as Halliburton’s CEO. Upon becoming Vice President Cheney, he oversold the invasion of Iraq by falsely alleging that an imminent threat was posed by Iraq’s nonexistent WMD arsenal.

Since the invasion, his cronies at Halliburton have reaped profits of at least $18 billion from their Iraq War contracts. And Halliburton’s revenues increased by 80% between 2003 and 2004.

Meanwhile, Halliburton was perpetrating countless acts of fraud, stealing multimillions through overbilling, and taking millions in kickbacks to its executives. For instance, the Defense Contract Audit Agency recently concluded that Halliburton overbilled US taxpayers by $212.3 million for fuel transportation in Iraq.

And Halliburton is currently under investigation by both the FBI and the Securities Exchange Commission for numerous illegalities. Nevertheless, Halliburton and its subsidiary KBR continue to receive lucrative no-bid, gold-plated defense contracts from the Pentagon.

Noting this blatant cronyism, CorpWatch disgustedly concludes that “Halliburton’s agenda is so merged with that of the Bush administration that questions raised by auditors, inspectors-general, and other independent agencies — not to mention corporate accountability groups – languish silently in Congress and the White House.” [7]

Furthermore, these same major defense contractors — the Carlyle Group, Bechtel, Halliburton, and their subsidiaries — have donated millions to the Republican Party and the Bush-Cheney campaign.

Additionally, they paid for extravagant parties at the 2004 political conventions and the 2005 presidential inauguration. In short, war is a lucrative business that pays the elite war-profiteers and the Washington bribe-ocrats handsomely, while it impoverishes the taxpayers, drains the federal coffers, decimates the target nations, and kills the combatants and their innocent victims hideously.

Overarching Conclusions:
21st-Century America Is Repeating Militarism’s Historical Pattern Of Economic Addiction To War

Warlust eventually ravages nations just like a highly-addictive narcotic ravages people. Warfare’s savagery inflicts destruction on prey nations immediately, whereas it destroys predator nations mediately.

War initially produces a stimulative “high” for the predator’s domestic economy. Leaders in predator nations ignore this opiate-like economic addiction to war because it serves to enrich their upper classes. Warfare is instantaneously lucrative for the military-industrial complex’s depraved war-profiteers, but can cause an entire region’s economy to become depraved war-addicts over time.

For instance, the Pentagon’s Base Realignment and Closure Commission (“BRAC” ) recently issued its report on military base closings. In response, US Senators insisted that they CANNOT close any military bases in their states, because bases provide jobs and generate income for local economies (e.g., $42 billion annually for California’s economy).

And US Representatives like House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter (R-CA) insisted that their districts CANNOT survive without the income generated by military bases (e.g., $18 billion annually for San Diego’s economy).

In other words, most states and large cities cannot survive without taxpayer-funded monetary injections from military bases, and this vast archipelago of bases cannot be justified without an endless succession of wars, so our regional economies are addicted to war. Hence, BRAC proposed closing only 33 out of 1,700 bases. Of course, no bases will be closed in Chairman Hunter’s militarily-dependent district, San Diego.

That’s about 1,000 less base closures than is necessary to provide adequate funding for America’s indispensable social safety-net programs. Moreover, a reduction to 700 bases would still allow the USA to have three bases in each of the 50 states, and at least one in every nation in the world. Folks, that’s more than enough! [8]

Consider that the economic “high” from an addiction to war is always a Faustian bargain. It compels the addicted nation to start an endless succession of destructive wars in order to avoid severe withdrawal symptoms, which otherwise would appear in the form of recessions and depressions. Penultimately, it forces the working class to pay the highest price in blood and treasure. Their children become cannon fodder and their taxes are squandered to finance military adventures.

Ultimately, war destroys empires as well as it does people. [9] Militaristic nations always collapse because their criminal acts of aggression are not only morally indefensible but also economically unsustainable.

Maybe progressive journalists who “speak truth to power” should bestow a more accurate name on the DOD: the “Department of Aggression” (“DOA”).

The Bottom Line: Might As Well Face It, We’re Addicted To War
One certainly need not be a pacifist to recognize that the Exhibits A-D provide powerful evidence that the USA is economically addicted to war. If so, this would explain why our political system is dominated by the ultra-militarist War Party and the crypto-fascist Bush family (i.e., the pushers), while our economic system is dominated by the military-industrial complex and its mafiosiesque war-profiteers (i.e., the kingpins).

Finally, if the USA is economically addicted to war, that raises some important moral questions. Readers of good conscience should be asking themselves: “Am I willing to engage in loving acts of nonviolent noncooperation with evil in order to stop my nation’s wars of aggression? Or will I watch in craven silence as this nation descends — like the Bush family’s multigenerational war-profiteers — into a vampiric career of bloodthirsty murderousness?

“If it’s the latter, won’t I be sending America’s children the depraved message that it’s permissible to murder people, so long as it’s profitable? Which destiny am I going to choose — nonviolent redemption or militaristic perdition?” [10]

In short, we’ve proved in Iraq that violence only begets more violence, and war more wars. It’s time to show the world the force of our example, not the example of our force.


• [1] Guy Anderson’s 5-4-05 Janes Defence Industry article, “US Defence Budget Will Equal Rest Of World’s Combined Within 12 Months”:

• [2] Siobhan McDonough’s 5-15-05 GU article, “Senate Panel OK’s Defense
Spending Boost” [ USA’s “defense” budget will be at least $500 billion in FY
2006.]: http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-5006745,00.html

• [3] UCSD Professor Emeritus Chalmers Johnson’s book, The Sorrows Of Empire:
Militarism, Secrecy, And The End Of The Republic
(Metropolitan Books, 2004).

• [4] Ibid. Also see these essays about militarism and nationalism:
• A. Norman Solomon’s 5-16-05 CD essay, “News Media And The ‘Madness of
Militarism'”: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0516-21.htm
• B. Howard Zinn’s 5-16-05 CD/TP essay, “The Scourge Of Nationalism”:

• [5] These articles provide the factual details about the Carlyle Group.
• A. HereInReality’s article, “The Carlyle Group: Former World Leaders
And War-Profiteering” [Articles and videos about CG.]: http://www.hereinreality.com/carlyle.html
• B. AngelFire’s “Meet The Carlyle Group” [Similar to 5A, but better
organized.]: http://www.angelfire.com/indie/pearly/htmls/bush-carlyle.html
• C. Naomi Klein’s 10-13-04 GU article, “Why War? Bush Special Envoy And Carlyle Group In Scandal Over Iraq Debt Relief” [ In 2004, former SOS and current Carlyle Group partner James Baker III was unethically involved in a classic conflict of interest, because he functioned publicly as the USA’s
debt-envoy to negotiate relief from Iraq’s international debts, and secretly as CG’s
representative to collect billions from Iraq for debts it owed to CG’s client, Kuwait.]”:
• D. William Thomas’ must-read 2004 WT article, “Inside The Bush-Carlyle Group Empire”:
Iron Triangle: Inside The Secret World Of The Carlyle Group.
• F. Christopher Bollyn’s 11-3-01 PP/AFP article, “War Is Sell: Washington’s Power Elite Are The Beneficiaries of War” [Reports that the Bush family is getting financially fat off of Dubya’s “War on Terror,” because 30% of CG’s investments are in defense-related companies, while two-thirds of CG’s investments are in defense and war-related telecommunications.]:
http://prisonplanet.com/washingtons_power_elite_are_the_beneficiaries_of_war .html
• G. LinkThing has collected the “Carlyle Group Articles,” ranging from 2001 to
mid-2004: http://linkthing.com/screed/carlyle_group_cluster.html

• [6] Jeffrey St. Clair’s 5-9-05 CP essay, “Straight to Bechtel: More Powerful
Than The US Army” [Excerpted from his forthcoming book, Grand Theft Pentagon:
How War Contractors Rip Off America And Threaten The World
(Common Courage
Press, July 2005).]: http://www.counterpunch.org/stclair05092005.html

• [7] These articles address Halliburton’s sleazy cronyism and war-profiteering.
• A. Andrea Buffa and Pratap Chatterjee’s 5-17-05 CD/CW essay, “Houston, We Still Have A Problem”: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0517-33.htm
• B. Scott Parkin’s 5-10-05 CP essay, “Pride Cometh Before A Fall: Taking Direct Action Against Halliburton”:
• C. The Committee on Government Reform Minority Office’s 5-2-05 article, “Halliburton Asked To Explain Discrepancies Between Testimony And Indictment http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=3D839&Issue=3DIraq=3DReco nstruction
• D. The Committee on Government Reform Minority Office’s 4-11-05 article, “DOD Audit Reports On Halliburton” [Government auditors find that Halliburton over billed US taxpayers by $212.3 million on its Iraq oil
http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/story.asp?ID=3D846&Issue=3DIraq=3DReco nstruction

• [8] These essays address the politics and economics of military base closings.
• A. Barbara Starr’s 5-13-05 CNN article, “Lawmakers Scramble To Save Bases”: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/13/base.closings/
• B. Associated Press’ 4-25-05 CNN article, “Base Closings Have Enormous
Political Ramifications: Republicans Have as Much To Lose As Democrats”: http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/04/25/base.closings.ap/index.html

• [9] The following two essays have been excerpted from BU Professor of International Relations Andrew Bacevich’s outstanding book, The New American Militarism: How Americans Are Seduced By War (Oxford U. Press, 2005).
• A. Andrew Bacevich’s must-read 4-21-05 CD/TD essay, “The Normalization
of War” [Correctly describes the symptoms, and diagnoses the causes, of America’s descent into militarism and perpetual war.]:
• B. Andrew Bacevich’s 4-22-05 CD/TD essay, “New Boys In Town” [Explains the neocons’ disastrous role in ratcheting up America’s addiction to war. They’re the warmongering public-relations division of the military-industrial complex.]: http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0422-34.htm

• [10] In addition to son George W. Bush and father GHWB, GWB’s paternal uncle,
“Bucky” Bush, is a war profiteer, as were his paternal grandfather, Prescott Bush, and his maternal great-grandfather, George Herbert Walker. Is this America’s destiny too?
• A. Evan Augustine Peterson III’s February 28, 2005 TPV essay, “On Bush Nepotism And American War-Profiteering” [Reports that:
• (1) the American war machine feeds big business, as illustrated by the fact that entire military-industrial complex is profiting mightily from its wars; and
• (2) certain relatives within Bush Family — including Dubya’s uncle, William “Bucky” Bush — are making substantial windfall earnings off of Mr. Bush’s elective wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
In short, war is business as usual for the Bush family war-profiteers specifically and the US military-industrial complex generally.]:
http://liberty.hypermart.net/voices/2005/print/On_Bush_Nepotism_And_American _War-Profiteering .htm

• B. Evan Augustine Peterson III’s 2-6-05 NFPNZ essay, “Of Militarism, Fascism, War And National Consciousness: Any Authentic Pilgrimage Toward A Nonviolent Society Requires A Clearer Understanding Of The Beast Within” [Concisely explains from a social sciences perspective the genesis of American militarism, the possibility that we are devolving into fascism, and the alternative possibility of becoming an authentically nonviolent society.]: http://nuclearfree.lynx.co.nz/of.htm

Evan Augustine Peterson III, J.D., is the Executive Director of the American Center for International Law (“ACIL”).

Message from the Iraqi Resistance

May 29th, 2005 - by admin

Nada Al-Rubaiee / Iraqi Patriotic Alliance – 2005-05-29 20:47:49


The Iraqi resistance is confronting the illegitimate and brutal Zionist Imperialist occupation of Iraq. Our resistance is legitimate according to international law and the UN Charter, including the right to resort to armed means. We are claiming our right to national self-determination and a real sovereignty

The different resisting groups in Iraq have developed a network between each other in order to achieve their ultimate goal. This goal was clearly addressed in their political program released after the liberation of Fallujah in April this year (2004). The program of the Iraqi resistance is as follows:

• 1. End the occupation and liberate the country
• 2. Transition period of 2 years
3. Iraqi united — National government for all
• 4. Iraqi constitution written by Iraqis themselves
• 5. Democratic rules
• 6. Free election and full participation of the different political parties

To implement the strategy of liberation, the Iraqi resistance is attacking occupying forces and their institutions and those who serve them with food, oil and other supplies. On the other hand, the Iraqi resistance is preventing the occupiers from using Oil as a political means.

Schools, churches, mosques and other civilian places have never been the target of the Iraqi resistance. Besides, we have to be very critical and careful about any kidnapping or killing process of a foreigner-worker in Iraq. The resistance has no benefit in attacking people like Margaret Hassan, two Simona’s or others. These actions are meant to discredit the legal resistance of our people

Here, we would like to share with you some of the heroic achievements of the Iraqi resistance:

• The Iraqi resistance was able to cause a high number of casualties in material and soldiers among the occupying forces.

• The resistance fighters were able to liberate 30 cities: creating a suitable environment for the resistant fighters by forming a death-zone for the occupying forces and their agents.

• The Iraqi resistance has defeated the Spanish imperialism and has forced 9 out of the occupying/ allying countries to leave Iraq. The Netherlands, Hungary and Poland are leaving Iraq next year.

• The Iraqi resistance was able to pull plunder companies out of Iraq; the so-called contractors “rebuilding companies”.

• The Iraqi resistance has renewed the spirit of resistance in the whole world by defeating the US imperialism in Fallujah, AlSamawa, Najaf and other Iraqi cities.

• The heroic resistance in Iraq has isolated UK and US in Iraq, preventing temporary the go-on of the “war on terror” against: Syria, Cuba and North Korea.

The resistance in Iraq is the resistance of the Iraqi people and it is mainly represented by the major political groups; the Patriotic, Islamic and the Pan- Arab groups.

By this, we want to emphasis on the fact that our resistance has an anti-imperialistic profile with Islamic and patriotic elements. Adding on that, the effective participation of members of the dismantled Iraqi army and the Ba’ath party.

We could expect some objections about the participation of the Ba’ath party in the resistance. There are more than three million active Ba’ath party members in Iraq. So, when we mention members of this party we do not mean – only — those who were in the former Iraqi government. But those who believe in the Ba’ath ideology expressed in their slogan: Unity, Liberty and socialism.

The fear of the Islamic character of the Iraqi resistance could be answered by the fact that after the liberation of Iraq, the Iraqi resistance will then be the only legitimized representative of the Iraqi people. A transition period will then give the Iraqi people the chance to choose their representatives to form a united national government with full participation of all parties including the Islamic forces. We have then to accept the choice of the Iraqi people.

As to the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance, we are proud to inform you that our secretary general in Iraq Mr. Abduljabbar al-Kubaysi was arrested on 3rd of September in Baghdad. The house he had temporarily stayed in was surrounded and stormed by about 50 US occupation soldiers employing helicopters and tanks. Mr. Al-Kubaysi was leading the IPA since the 90’s against the economic sanctions and the Zionistic and imperialistic plans of the US in Iraq.

During his latest activities building a united political front of the resistance against the occupation, he was arrested without any charges. At this moment we know nothing about his situation. Even his family is unable to contact hem. We hold the occupying forces responsible for the health and life of Mr. Al-Kubaysi and all other prisoners in Iraq.

We hope for further coordination between you and us in our shared struggle against occupation and imperialism.

Long lives the Iraqi Resistance
In Solidarity,

Nada Al-Rubaiee [on behalf of the Iraqi Patriotic Alliance (IPA)]
Tel: 0031- (0)-645542498

Archives by Month:



Stay Connected
Sign up to receive our weekly updates. We promise not to sell, trade or give away your email address.
Email Address:
Full Name:

Home | Say NO! To War | Action! | Information | Media Center | Who We Are