OH, AMERICA: Senate Overwhelmingly Approves Bill to Fund Iraq War Until Mid-2009

Report Raised Questions About Pentagon Spending;
Our country is in the throes of a recession or maybe the start of a depression and we are throwing away billions to Bush's war. Where are the priorities of our leaders lie? Katrina victims.........ancient history!! the Iowa flood victims.............. forget you!!

OH, AMERICA:US General Accuses Bush Administration of War Crimes

Mideast Preparation for Iran War and the West Hijacked II......

Israel's Nuclear Capabilities With between 200 and 500 thermonuclear weapons and a sophisticated delivery system, Israel has quietly supplanted Britain as the World's 5th Largest nuclear power, and may currently rival France and China in the size and sophistication of its nuclear arsenal. Although dwarfed by the nuclear arsenals of the U.S. and Russia, each possessing over 10,000 nuclear weapons, Israel nonetheless is a major nuclear power, and should be publicly recognized as such.

THE TRUTH IS REVEALED "IRAQ FOR OIL" JUST AS THE PHILIPPINES WAS TO A COLONY IN THE FAR EAST

In the words of Mark Twain a century ago, about the invasion of the Philippines. The striking similarity with the war in Iraq for oil, the establishment of military bases in the Middle East, a colony in the Far East, bases in the Philippines aimed at the new global market in Asia.

For, presently, came the Philippine temptation. It was strong; it was too strong, and he made that bad mistake: he played the European game, the Chamberlain game. It was a pity; it was a great pity, that error; that one grievous error, that irrevocable error. For it was the very place and time to play the American game again. And at no cost. Rich winnings to be gathered in, too; rich and permanent; indestructible; a fortune transmissible forever to the children of the flag. Not land, not money, not dominion – no, something worth many times more than that dross: our share, the spectacle of a nation of long harassed and persecuted slaves set free through our influence; our posterity's share, the golden memory of that fair deed.

"They look doubtful, but in reality they are not. There have been lies; yes, but they were told in a good cause. We have been treacherous; but that was only in order that real good might come out of apparent evil. True, we have crushed a deceived and confiding people; we have turned against the weak and the friendless who trusted us; we have stamped out a just and intelligent and well-ordered republic; we have stabbed an ally in the back and slapped the face of a guest; we have bought a Shadow from an enemy that hadn't it to sell; we have robbed a trusting friend of his land and his liberty; we have invited our clean young men to shoulder a discredited musket and do bandit's work under a flag which bandits have been accustomed to fear, not to follow; we have debauched America's honor and blackened her face before the world; but each detail was for the best. We know this.

The Head of every State and Sovereignty in Christendom and ninety per cent. of every legislative body in Christendom, including our Congress and our fifty State Legislatures, are members not only of the church, but also of the Blessings-of-Civilization Trust. This world-girdling accumulation of trained morals, high principles, and justice, cannot do an unright thing, an unfair thing, an ungenerous thing, an unclean thing. It knows what it is about. Give yourself no uneasiness; it is all right."..............Mark Twain

Our Legacy from President Bush " The Iraq War"

Congress' cowardice, complicity

Bush sidestepped the legislature and signed a bilateral treaty with the government of Iraq, which will be in effect long after his presidency. The inability of congress to check Bush with another power grab, has emboldened this president to act unilaterally, without the blessings of the other branches of our government.

On November 26, 2007, President Bush and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki signed a U.S.-Iraq Declaration of Principles for a "long-term bilateral relationship," an attempt to lock in Bush's policies for a permanent U.S. presence in Iraq.

The heart of Bush’s policy was an allusion to the perspective of permanent US military and political control over Iraq. Bush in a speech last September 14, 2007 said, “understand that their success will require US political, economic and security engagement that extends beyond my presidency. These Iraqi leaders have asked for an enduring relationship with America.”

While the Bush administration describes these principles as a nonbinding "mutual statement of intent," they are the first step toward formal negotiation of a "strategic framework agreement" by July 2008, according to Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute, the assistant to the president for Iraq and Afghanistan.


Lute made it clear that the Bush administration has no intention of consulting with Congress: "We don't anticipate now that these negotiations will lead to the status of a formal treaty which would then bring us to formal negotiations or formal inputs from the Congress."

The fact that Bush feels himself in a position to even make such a move is due, above all, to the cowardice and complicity of this Congress. Is there no end to this tragedy?



We should have listened to remarks of President Dwight Eisenhower in 1953:

"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. ... We pay for a single fighter plane with a half million bushels of wheat. We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than eight thousand people. This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking. This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron."

World Economy Geopolitics Energy Intelligence Sex Trade Trafficking Sci/Tech SocietyAnalysis Commentary Miscellaneous

More than one million Iraqi deaths since US invasion

As part of its campaign to justify a long-term US occupation of Iraq, the Bush administration has increasingly resorted to warning of chaos and even genocide in the wake of a withdrawal of American troops. But a new report suggests that something akin to genocide is already taking place, under American auspices.

The British polling agency ORB reported Thursday that the death tool in Iraq since the 2003 US invasion has passed the one million mark.
According to ORB, US-occupied Iraq, with an estimated 1.2 million violent deaths, has “a murder rate that now exceeds the Rwanda genocide from 1994 (800,000 murdered),” with another one million wounded and millions more driven from their homes into internal or external exile.

ORB (Opinion Research Business), which has conducted polls in Iraq since 2005, released the findings of a survey of 1,461 adults across the country. Among other questions, it asked: “How many members of your household, if any, have died as a result of the conflict in Iraq since 2003 (i.e., as a result of violence rather than a natural death such as old age)? Please note that I mean those who were actually living under your roof.”

Of those responding, 78 percent said their households had experienced no violent deaths, 16 percent had experienced one death, 5 percent two deaths, 1 percent three deaths or more. Given the number of households in the country, 4,050,597 according to 2005 census figures, this works out to nearly 1.2 million deaths.

The survey found that 48 percent of the violent deaths were due to gunshot wounds, 20 percent to car bombs, 9 percent to aerial bombardment, 6 percent to other ordnance or explosions, and 6 percent to accidents.

The figure for aerial bombardments is particularly noteworthy since such deaths—numbering well over 100,000 according to the ORB study—go virtually unreported in the American media. This is doubtless because such killings are entirely the work of the US and British occupation forces, the only ones equipped with helicopters and warplanes.

The ORB survey found a far higher death rate than the figures released by Western media outlets, the US-established Iraqi government in Baghdad, or the United Nations. But it dovetails with the public health survey conducted last year by a team of scientists from Johns Hopkins University and published in the British medical journal Lancet, which estimated the death toll (as of early 2006, nearly 18 months ago), at about 665,000.

The Lancet figures were denounced by the US and Iraqi governments and dismissed by the American media, and the ORB figures are likely to face the same fate. The study’s findings were reported only in passing in Friday’s daily newspapers, most prominently by the Los Angeles Times and Boston Globe, not at all by the New York Times or Washington Post.

The ORB survey was based on face-to-face interviews conducted between August 12 and August 19 among a nationally representative sample of 1,720 adults (of whom 1,461 responded), with a standard margin of error of 2.4 percent. Random sampling was used to select those interviewed in 15 of Iraq’s 18 provinces.

For security reasons, no interviews were conducted in Al Anbar or Karbala provinces, or in the province of Irbil, where Kurdish authorities refused to allow field interviews. Since Anbar and Karbala are among the bloodiest battlefields of the war, and Irbil among the quietest, the exclusion of the three provinces would more likely to lead to an underestimation of the death toll than an exaggeration.

The ORB study was made public on the same day that President Bush went on national television to deliver a report on conditions in Iraq that was nothing short of delusional. With a million Iraqis dead, a million wounded, and four to five million displaced, Bush hailed the return of “normal life” to the devastated country. “Sectarian killings are down, and ordinary life is beginning to return,” he said.

The war in Iraq is the war of President Bush

1999: George W. Bush Hints at Invading Iraq in Future Presidency

The war in Iraq is the war of President Bush and every cowardly member of Congress who voted to give him war-waging powers out of fear of being viewed as "unpatriotic" in the wake of 9/11. Bush's definition of victory is an Iraq where everyone gets along and it is a peaceful, democratic society. Good luck with that.

Hot Zone Documentary

Bush calls for permanent US military occupation of Iraq in nationally televised address

How cruel it is to keep sending American soldiers into this meat grinder in pursuit of this impossible dream! We need to pull out, let the Iraqis hash it out, and offer closely-audited economic aid to help the winners rebuild their country as reparations for the damage that we have allowed this president to do in our name.


Personally, I have more respect for someone like Clinton, who was up front about his objections to the Vietnam War and did what he could to avoid serving in it, than for George W. Bush, who avoided combat in the Air National Guard (courtesy of family influence), so that he could claim to have "served his country". That is the very definition of a hypocritical chicken hawk.

If I Die Before You Wake

Dedicated To The American Soldier, the men and women in uniform in the service of our country overseas.

It was reasonably certain that Saddam was not hiding any new WMD because once we had surrounded Iraq with our military, he didn't restrict access to any site. Bush still chose to invade for the petty reason of establishing his legacy as a "wartime president". George Tenet, no matter who appointed him, was the same type of weak-willed, eager-to-please, do-anything-to-keep-the-job person as Condoleeza Rice, Alberto Gonzales and sad to say, Colin Powell turned out to be.

Read it and weep.

"US and the Triumph of Unilateralism,"Asia Times, Sept. 10, 2002

"George Bush and the World,"New York Review of Books, Sept. 26, 2002 issue

"The Next World Order,"The New Yorker, March 25, 2002

"Saddam in the Crosshairs,"Village Voice, Nov. 21-27, 2001

"Rebuilding America's Defenses,"Project for a New Century, September 2000

"Statement of Principles,"Project for a New American Century, June 3, 1997

"Fortunes of war await Bush's circle after attacks on Iraq,"The Independent (UK), Sept. 15, 2002

"Don't Mention the O-Word,"The Economist, Sept. 12, 2002

"Backing on Iraq? Let's Make a Deal,"Los Angeles Times, Sept. 13, 2002

"In Iraqi War Scenario, Oil is a Key Issue,"Washington Post, Sept. 15, 2002

"Cronies in Arms,"New York Times, Sept. 17, 2002

"Questions That Won't Be Asked About Iraq,"U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, Republican, Texas, Sept. 10, 2002

"Bombs Will Deepen Iraq's Nightmare: An Iraqi Dissident Speaks,"The Guardian, Sept. 17, 2002

"Looking War in the Face,"Boston Globe, Sept. 10, 2002

"Iraqgate,"Columbia Journalism Review, May/June 1993

1988: Bin Ladens Bail Out George W. Bush?
The WMD that were found were so old that they were no longer of any use, made from components supplied by us during the Iran-Iraq war. The slaughter of the Kurds using these weapons occurred in 1987 and 1988, while the darling of Conservatives, Ronald Reagan, stood by. I have nothing but respect for the military men and women who do what they are asked, but nothing but contempt for the cowards who sit comfortably in the White House sending them off to die for a legacy, not our protection.




June 4, 1992: FBI Investigates Ties Between George W. Bush and Saudi Money
sEL('1626004942-10001','10001')

James Bath. [Source: Time Life Images]The FBI investigates connections between James Bath and George W. Bush, according to published reports. Bath is Salem bin Laden’s official representative in the US. Bath’s business partner contends that, “Documents indicate that the Saudis were using Bath and their huge financial resources to influence US policy,” since George W. Bush’s father is president. George W. Bush denies any connections to Saudi money. What becomes of this investigation is unclear, but no charges are ever filed. [Houston Chronicle, 6/4/1992] July 2000: Bush Meets with Suspected Terrorism Supporters

Recently Updated Events.

View all events for this timeline (1094)
Timelines filtered by category
Key Events
Key events related to DSM (57)
General Topic Areas
Alleged al-Qaeda ties (90)Politicization of intelligence (98)Pre-9/11 plans for war (36)Weapons inspections (124)Alleged WMDs (124)The decision to invade (127)Internal opposition (30)Motives (71)Pre-war planning (31)Predictions (35)Legal justification (102)Propaganda (33)Public opinion on Iraqi threatDiversion of Resources to Iraq (9)Pre-war attacks against Iraq (18)
Specific Allegations
Africa-uranium allegation (119)Al Zarqawi allegation (10)Aluminum tubes allegation (79)Biological weapons trailers (53)Drones (6)Poisons And Gases (5)Prague Connection (27)
Specific cases and issues
Anabasis (12)Chalabi and the INC (68)Office of Special Plans (30)Outing of Jose Bustani (13)Powells Speech to UN (21)Spying on the UN (8)
Quotes from senior US officials
Chemical and biological weapons allegations (25)Imminent threat allegations (8)Iraq ties to terrorist allegations (17)Nuclear weapons allegations (28)WMD allegations (9)Democracy rhetoric (33)Decision to Invade quotes (20)
Events Recently Added to the Inquiry into the decision to invade Iraq timeline

5/11 - Cheney Gives Speech at Institute of Petroleum, Autumn 1999, posted by Derek
4/19 - ConocoPhillips CEO ‘Covet[s] the Opportunity to Get’ Iraq Oil, February 2003, posted by Derek
4/19 - Former Iraqi Oil Minister Believes Iraq Could One Day Rival Saudi Arabia in Oil Production, February 2003, posted by Derek
4/19 - Shell Oil Looking for PR Officer with ‘Strong Family Connections’ to Work for Shell Iraq, August 2004, posted by Derek
4/18 - US-Educated Iraqi Oil Minister Announces that Plan for Privatization of Iraq’s Oil Industry is in the Works, September 4, 2003, posted by Derek

I am only showing all the sides of the spectrum. To be silent, in view of what is happening to our country is a crime. I have to speak up, not only because it is my right, but I do not want to be an enabler to the waste being done to my fellow citizen and to the world. The WTC event was capitalized by the Bush Administration's false justifications for war in Iraq within the larger context of a two-decade struggle by neoconservatives to dramatically increase military spending in the wake of the Cold War, and to expand American power globally by means of military force. The plans for the attack on Iraq, was made 2 years in advance and decisions were already made by Bush and company to invade before 2003, the only problem was the selling of the war to the American people. Thereafter, the congress, the people got duped into believing Iraq was a threat and a terrorist base.

Again, Mr. Bush is doing the same kind of propaganda to convince the American public in the expansion of troop strength in Iraq. This may touch a wider war that will include Iran and Syria. Meanwhile, preparations are underway towards that objective. There are now two carrier battle groups in that area, instead of just one in the initial invasion previously. A navy admiral commands all the troops in that area, instead of the two battle tested field army or marine generals. Who needs a navy admiral in a land war, except for a wider war. Something big is in the works and being cooked as we speak. Those carrier battle groups represent a projection of power in a wider theater of war, there is a sinister plan in effect and could be the possible invasion of Iran and Syria. We do not need another war.

If Mr. Bush is using those carrier battle groups as a tool for gunboat diplomacy, we are being seen again by the people of the world as a bully. Congress, the people, should be aware of all these motives of our fearless leader, sacrificing our youth and duping us to another war. We do not need this war. The legislative branch of our government should check and balance the moves of this runaway administration.

The attack on Iraq caused the lives of over 1,200,000 civilians. The destruction of a sovereign country, that was not a threat to us. The total anarchy in Iraq that lead to a civil war, the blood and lives of our troops, the debasing of our economy only for what, the naivete of this president of the difference between Sunnis and Shiites (that Saddam was the stabilizing factor that prevented both sects from killing each other) or there is his axe to grind against Saddam, or is it the oil.........................ASC
Bush before the midterm election was trying to pass thru congress a provision to make him and his cronies safe from War Crimes Prosecution."Here's the deal: Under the War Crimes Act, violations of the Geneva Conventions are felonies, in some cases ... all punishable by death. When the Supreme Court ruled that the Geneva Convention applied to al Qaeda and Taliban detainees, President Bush and his boys were suddenly in big trouble. They've been working these prisoners over pretty good. In an effort to avoid possible prosecution they're trying to cram this bill through Congress before the end of the week before Congress adjourns. The reason there's such a rush to do this? If the Democrats get control of the House in November this kind of legislation probably wouldn't pass. "You wanna know the real disgrace about what these people are about to do or are in the process of doing? Senator Bill Frist and Congressman Dennis Hastert and their Republican stooges apparently don't see anything wrong with this. I really do wonder sometimes what we're becoming in this country."

If you're interested in knowing this other truth, horrible as it is, then I suggest you watch this and other videos. These atrocities, will continue until the American people wake up and put a stop to this evil. The first step is to understand and have an open mind that this could really be happening.

1999: George W. Bush Hints at Invading Iraq in Future Presidency


Mickey Herskowitz. [Source: Public domain]Presidential candidate George W. Bush tells prominent Texas author and Bush family friend Mickey Herskowitz, who is helping Bush write an autobiography, that as president he would invade Iraq if given the opportunity. “One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief,” Herskowitz remembers Bush saying. “My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of [Kuwait] and he wasted it. If I have a chance to invade Iraq, if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.” Herskowitz later says he believes Bush’s comments were intended to distinguish himself from his father, rather than express a desire to invade Iraq.

breaking the silence

John Pilger dissects the truth and lies in the 'war on terror'. Award-winning journalist John Pilger investigates the discrepancies between American and British claims for the 'war on terror' and the facts on the ground as he finds them in Afghanistan and Washington, DC. In 2001, as the bombs began to drop, George W. Bush promised Afghanistan "the generosity of America and its allies". Now, the familiar old warlords are regaining power, religious fundamentalism is renewing its grip and military skirmishes continue routinely. In "liberated" Afghanistan, America has its military base and pipeline access, while the people have the warlords who are, says one woman, "in many ways worse than the Taliban". In Washington, Pilger conducts a series of remarkable interviews with William Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, and leading Administration officials such as Douglas Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, and John Bolton, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security. These people, and the other architects of the Project for the New American Century, were dismissed as 'the crazies' by the first Bush Administration in the early 90s when they first presented their ideas for pre-emptive strikes and world domination. Pilger also interviews presidential candidate General Wesley Clark, and former intelligence officers, all the while raising searching questions about the real motives for the 'war on terror'. While President Bush refers to the US attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq as two 'great victories', Pilger asks the question - victories over whom, and for what purpose? Pilger describes Afghanistan as a country "more devastated than anything I have seen since Pol Pot's Cambodia". He finds that Al-Qaida has not been defeated and that the Taliban is re-emerging. And of the "victory" in Iraq, he asks: "Is this Bush's Vietnam?"