brian carroll on Mon, 17 Oct 2005 11:08:29 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> .US nuclear pols |
(check - check, 1 - 2 - 3 -, testing - testing. can you hear me? check check, testing. are you ready? check check...) over the years on this list a general premise has been that electromagnetism is a realm where politics operates today, and to offer some examples of this, whether by way of the use of media, focus of topics such as nuclear or I.T., or the issues that becomes central during current events. it has thus been surprising how this electromagnetic context has provided a single view of the last few years, in that the issues of energy and oil, war and weapons, media and ideas have coalesced in such a way as to potentially offer insight in the cohesiveness of events though they may otherwise be seen as disconnected by division of topics, viewpoints, etc. it is a critical time here in the .US, these next few weeks will change the direction of the world, most certainly, and which way it is still unknown --- one aspect is the .US investigation into the leaking of an undercover CIA agent's information in retaliation for challenging the cause for the war going in Iraq. the agent was versed in WMD, the case for war was nuclear, the fabricated evidence from aluminum tubes, satellite images, and yellowcake uranium, to the Vice President and Condi Rice referencing a NY Times story by Judith Miller, justified such a view of nuclear 'mushroom clouds' if the .US does not enter into a pre-emptive war with Iraq, outside the .UN's own IAEA (atomic energy agency) which, as with others, raised serious doubts about the claims being made (and Mr. El Baradei and the IAEA was just awarded the Nobel Peace Prize last week), while there is still more to go on the agenda, it would appear... the big question may be where this ends up, as an investigation as it could either be contained into a certain segment of inquiry or it could go far and wide into situations preceding the present. and this would be a major concern, where it will be stopped and if it will be obstructed from actually getting to earlier connections. by this I mean that this situation, from the 2000 election forward, provides plenty of questions for the issues now at center stage, and thus it is curious if the connections which were at the time questioned, such as the Energy Task Force led by VP Cheney, Enron's Ken Lay, and Halliburton, and held off-record by Judge Scalia, a VP Cheney friend & confidant during a Supreme Court challenge to public access to these records, and the subsequent distancing of Enron and its plans for global domination of the oil and broadband markets - and the billions in bankruptcy while he remains living in a Houston penthouse - at the same time a role of Halliburton being handed contracts for the rebuilding of Iraq, and hurricane redevelopments, in no-bid contracts, would seem to indicate a conflict of interest in writing public energy policies-- which have left the .US in strategic and security limbo as a direct result of these same conflicts of interest realized in other events. For instance, documents of the Energy Task Force led by VP Cheney had somehow included maps of the oilfields of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, and other places in regards to planning out .US energy policy - potentially also in relation to the .US war in Iraq - and it was Dan Bartlett (if memory serves) or it may have been Andrew Card who could not explain how such documents were involved in the meeting, or why James Baker, the Bush family liason, was involved in moving these maps of oilfields between Cheney (oil executive), Bush (oil executive), and others (Rice, Baker, Bush Sr., others). such maps of the oilfields were, at the time, speculated and feared as being of some larger design for the invasion of several countries to take over the oil-fields, yet such a strategy would be hard to imagine, given that there was no reporting going on, nor any basic oversight into the private energy meetings or the WHIG (White House Iraq Group) and likely other 'groups'. such as any involving energy policy and planning related to Iraq and oil fields and their possible connection to Enron, Halliburton, and the .US military as a tool of private corporate strategy. 2,000 dead .US soldiers & tens of thousands of dead Iraqis later, and the failure to secure any of the original objectives of the invasion and occupation of Iraq, save its 'democracy', and yet talk remains of the original agenda, as it was stated by another country of .US battle planning, that Syria and Iran would be next in line after Iraq. and once again the nuclear context is a pre-text, and the .US is to potentially isolate itself by continuing the same policy agenda without any insight into the earlier justifications - with no real understanding of how it fits together at a time when the .US President was elected- on election day, no less, the lowest prices for gasoline in the .US on that day, while the electrical grid was being turned off by Enron in California, and other such 'conspiring' events. therefore, it should be of some interest that in a memo now released in Britain, that President Bush mentioned to Tony Blair in early 2003 that Saudi Arabia was on his ideological map in relation to WMD issues (after Iraq). what is interesting about this is that, previous to this, there were simultaneously also 'actual maps' that were by all accounts involved in some way in the Iraq campaign and the energy planning taskforce, an entirely secretive policy 'group' (sounding like the WHIG), which could be instructive about a .US global strategy that may have involved a plan of invasions of oil fields, if such mention was to indicate it involved seizing Saudi oil fields. there is no evidence that the leaked maps of oilfields relate to such a Nazi-like military campaign for geographic control, and yet there is no evidence these maps were not involved in such motivations, as all the policy groups have been held in secret - and by VP Cheney, by Halliburton, and by Enron, no less. this is why the word 'probable cause' was invented. of course there are other aspects in the existing scenario not even being mentioned here, though the potential also exists for subversion of .US policy by an agenda which was to put .US policy in service of non-.US policy objectives, and once again this same issue can be found in the .UN and in relation to current ongoing fiascos waiting to erupt in regard to a double-standard for the role of nuclear power in relation to current events, in which the Vice President has again and again stated that the .US may preemptively strike at Iran's (legal) nuclear facilities, and if not the .US, else Israel will have to take it upon itself to pursue its policy without proxy. (is any of this going to help address problems of terrorism?) note: this is not to discount the reality of tensions and actual issues - only that the corruption and incompetence are broad and deep and continuing to guide .US policy, and to the brink... and in whose interest is such decision-making? once again, a common (.US and world) public that is represented in the best ways, given the options, or some more private and secret view of things, being manipulated at the level of global nuclear policy, international and national and local institutions, the .US military, the .US congress, .US court systems, .US legal and financial systems, the .US energy policy, and the .US media - all being driven by a similar agenda to pursue such a policy that is now proven by popular vote (the TV poll) to not being in the best interests of the majority of the .US citizens -- thus how can such a policy be continued without review and oversight into the greater motivations driving these odd correspondences, to the uncanny point of secret codes being written from VP Chief of Staff, Stewart Libby, to NYT reporter Judy Miller - about some biological warfare news she will be reporting soon, when oddly enough she was involved in an anthrax hoax letter while others got the real stuff in their mailboxes. if this ongoing investigation by the Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald stops with the outing of Valerie Plame, and does not enter into earlier 'coincidences' including Enron, Energy Task Force meetings, the VP and Halliburton, it could limit the ability address the underlying motivations dug into the existing system which is how and why such a policy is being pursued, in whose name, and for what effects- and if this is actually, sanely or insanely, in pursuit of a "war of terrorism" as a pre-text to pursue another agenda, entirely, as such to possibly leave the general situation contained with the same actors free to continue pursuing what amounts to traitorous activities, and if proven guilty, will justify capital punishment, including the highest ranking members in .US government... should they have subverted .US policies for private powers. this is the context in which .US policy continues to be made, and until it is thoroughly investigated, it remains a mystery. kind of like the JFK assassination, 40+ years ago, it makes one wonder who has gained the most in subsequent years... (be prepared either way. night of the endless blog entries...) 1) Bush to Blair: First Iraq, then Saudi http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article319993.ece ' "If this letter accurately reflects the conversation between the President and the Prime Minister it will cause consternation, particularly in Saudi Arabia. American policy in the Middle East for decades has been based on support for Israel and an alliance with Saudi Arabia," [Sir Menzies Campbell, the Liberal Democrats' foreign affairs spokesman] said. "If this was more than loose talk and represented a genuine policy intention it constitutes a radical change in American foreign policy."' 2) It's Bush-Cheney, Not Rove-Libby By Frank Rich The New York Times Sunday 16 October 2005 http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/101605Z.shtml "Very little has been written about the White House Iraq Group, or WHIG. Its inception in August 2002, seven months before the invasion of Iraq, was never announced. Only much later would a newspaper article or two mention it in passing, reporting that it had been set up by Andrew Card, the White House chief of staff. Its eight members included Mr. Rove, Mr. Libby, Condoleezza Rice and the spinmeisters Karen Hughes and Mary Matalin. Its mission: to market a war in Iraq. Of course, the official Bush history would have us believe that in August 2002 no decision had yet been made on that war. Dates bracketing the formation of WHIG tell us otherwise. On July 23, 2002 - a week or two before WHIG first convened in earnest - a British official told his peers, as recorded in the now famous Downing Street memo, that the Bush administration was ensuring that "the intelligence and facts" about Iraq's W.M.D.'s "were being fixed around the policy" of going to war. And on Sept. 6, 2002 - just a few weeks after WHIG first convened - Mr. Card alluded to his group's existence by telling Elisabeth Bumiller of The New York Times that there was a plan afoot to sell a war against Saddam Hussein: "From a marketing point of view, you don't introduce new products in August." The official introduction of that product began just two days later. On the Sunday talk shows of Sept. 8, Ms. Rice warned that "we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud," and Mr. Cheney, who had already started the nuclear doomsday drumbeat in three August speeches, described Saddam as "actively and aggressively seeking to acquire nuclear weapons." The vice president cited as evidence a front-page article, later debunked, about supposedly nefarious aluminum tubes co-written by Judy Miller in that morning's Times. The national security journalist James Bamford, in "A Pretext for War," writes that the article was all too perfectly timed to facilitate "exactly the sort of propaganda coup that the White House Iraq Group had been set up to stage-manage." The administration's doomsday imagery was ratcheted up from that day on. As Barton Gellman and Walter Pincus of The Washington Post would determine in the first account of WHIG a full year later, the administration's "escalation of nuclear rhetoric" could be traced to the group's formation. Along with mushroom clouds, uranium was another favored image, the Post report noted, "because anyone could see its connection to an atomic bomb." It appeared in a Bush radio address the weekend after the Rice-Cheney Sunday show blitz and would reach its apotheosis with the infamously fictional 16 words about "uranium from Africa" in Mr. Bush's January 2003 State of the Union address on the eve of war. Throughout those crucial seven months between the creation of WHIG and the start of the American invasion of Iraq, there were indications that evidence of a Saddam nuclear program was fraudulent or nonexistent. Joseph Wilson's C.I.A. mission to Niger, in which he failed to find any evidence to back up uranium claims, took place nearly a year before the president's 16 words. But the truth never mattered. The Bush-Cheney product rolled out by Card, Rove, Libby & Company had been bought by Congress, the press and the public. The intelligence and facts had been successfully fixed to sell the war, and any memory of Mr. Bush's errant 16 words melted away in Shock and Awe. When, months later, a national security official, Stephen Hadley, took "responsibility" for allowing the president to address the nation about mythical uranium, no one knew that Mr. Hadley, too, had been a member of WHIG. It was not until the war was supposedly over - with "Mission Accomplished," in May 2003 - that Mr. Wilson started to add his voice to those who were disputing the administration's uranium hype. Members of WHIG had a compelling motive to shut him down. In contrast to other skeptics, like Mohamed ElBaradei of the International Atomic Energy Agency (this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner), Mr. Wilson was an American diplomat; he had reported his findings in Niger to our own government. He was a dagger aimed at the heart of WHIG and its disinformation campaign. Exactly who tried to silence him and how is what Mr. Fitzgerald presumably will tell us." brian thomas carroll: research-design-development architecture, education, electromagnetism http://www.mnartists.org/brian_carroll http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/ # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net