MAY LOVE PREVAIL ON EARTH


June 15, 2004

Veracity Series #8: The Coming Fall of a Tyrannic Dictator in the Making



Hello everyone

Instead of trying to qualify this compilation, I would like instead to refer you to the archived copy of this compilation to see 3 pictures worth many thousand words...

"Wizard of Oz Revisited"



"Liars R' Us"



"Orwellian Bush"



Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

Free subscription to such compilations by sending a blank email to earthrainbownetwork-subscribe@lists.riseup.net

This compilation is archived at http://www.earthrainbownetwork.com/Archives2004/Veracity8.htm


"Congress lacks authority … to set the terms and conditions under which the president may exercise his authority as commander in chief to control the conduct of operations during a war…Congress may no more regulate the president's ability to detain and interrogate enemy combatants than it may regulate his ability to direct troop movements on the battlefield. Accordingly, we would construe [the law] to avoid this difficulty and conclude that it does not apply to the president's detention and interrogation of enemy combatants."

- From a 56-page memo, "Detainee Interrogation in the Global War on Terrorism" written by a legal team for the Secretary of Defense on the eve of the Iraq War.)


"Congress shall have the power … to declare war and make rules concerning captures on land and water … to define offenses against the law of nations [and] to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces."

- From the Constitution, David G. Savage and Richard B. Schmitt, Lawyers Ascribed Broad Power to Bush on Torture, the Los Angeles Times)


"We need to have a less-cramped view of what torture is and is not."

- A military official explaining the approach of the team writing the above memo, Jess Bravin, Pentagon Report Set Framework For Use of Torture, The Wall Street Journal)


"It's a very cowboy kind of affair."

- Lt. Col. Steven L. Jordan, who controlled the Joint Interrogation and Debriefing Center at Abu Ghraib prison, speaking of the actions of the CIA unit there, R. Jeffrey Smith, Soldier Described White House Interest, the Washington Post)

The quotes above introduce the following article:

George Orwell… meet Franz Kafka
http://www.nationinstitute.org/tomdispatch/index.mhtml?emx=x&pid=1494
Recommended by Goldi goldi316@ameritech.net> who wrote: "This article ties it all together, the whole ugly picture... I read with mixed feelings: revulsion at the heinous actions of those who are in control of the highest offices of this country, loathing at the remembered justifications and rationalizations given by their slavish followers - both public and private - along with a sense of hope amid the breaking of my heart over what they have done to so many. The ever-growing numbers of leaks coming from within this administration is what gives me hope that this country can yet be saved, this madness healed..."

Here is the first paragraph of this article...

"For his dystopia, 1984, his classic novel of totalitarianism, George Orwell created "Room 101," an interrogation room where a prisoner's deepest fears were to be realized and applied. Tier 1 in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, as the now-infamous photos indicate, was the Bush administration's Room 101 for the "Arab mind," and so the crown jewel of its global interrogation facilities; just as Guantanamo was the "crown jewel" of the prison camps in its global Bermuda Triangle of injustice; just as the new appointed "interim government" hidden within the ever-more fortified Green Zone in Baghdad and led by a prime minister and former CIA asset whose exile organization, we learned this week, once set off car bombs in downtown Baghdad, is now the crown jewel of "freedom and democracy" in the Middle East. This is our "war against terrorism." Talk about an Orwellian world."

---

Quotes from Reagan

President Rios Montt [is] a man of great personal integrity and commitment who wants to improve the quality of life for all Guatemalans, and [is] getting a 'bum rap' on human rights." -- Reagan, '82, speaking about Rios Montt, former dictator of Guatemala. During his reign, approximately 70,000 peasants and political dissidents were killed by the Guatemalan government.

"They have eliminated the segregation that we once had in our own country..." Reagan, '85, praising the government of P.W. Botha in South Africa, during the height of Apartheid.

"They are the moral equivalent of America's founding fathers." -- Reagan, '85, referring to the brutal Contra rebels in Nicaragua, who indiscriminately attacked civilians.

"...an example to the world of the ideals we hold most dear, the ideals of freedom and independence." -- Reagan, '85, praising the Afghan Mujahaddin. These "freedom fighters" included prominent leaders of Al Qaeda, such as Osama Bin Laden, as well as many of the leaders for the Taliban.

"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." - Reagan '81

MANY MORE SUCH "Quotes from Reagan" at http://www.livejournal.com/users/insomnia/422922.html



CONTENTS


1. Bush's Psychiatric Profile: He is a Certifiable Madman
2. Administration Lawyers Ascribed Broad Power to Bush on Torture
3. COUP D'ETAT: The Real Reason Tenet and Pavitt Resigned from the CIA on June 3rd and 4th
4. Oil Gone
5. Dawn of the G8 New World Order


See also:

Retired Officials Say Bush Must Go (13 June 2004)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061404A.shtml
The 26 ex-diplomats and military leaders say his foreign policy has harmed national security. Several served under Republicans. Washington - A group of 26 former senior diplomats and military officials, several appointed to key positions by Republican Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, plans to issue a joint statement this week arguing that President George W. Bush has damaged America's national security and should be defeated in November. The group, which calls itself Diplomats and Military Commanders for Change, will explicitly condemn Bush's foreign policy, according to several of those who signed the document. "It is clear that the statement calls for the defeat of the administration," said William C. Harrop, the ambassador to Israel under President Bush's father and one of the group's principal organizers. Those signing the document, which will be released in Washington on Wednesday, include 20 former U.S. ambassadors, appointed by presidents of both parties, to countries including Israel, the former Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia. Others are senior State Department officials from the Carter, Reagan and Clinton administrations and former military leaders, including retired Marine Gen. Joseph P. Hoar, the former commander of U.S. forces in the Middle East under President Bush's father. Hoar is a prominent critic of the war in Iraq. Some of those signing the document - such as Hoar and former Air Force Chief of Staff Merrill A. McPeak - have identified themselves as supporters of Sen. John F. Kerry, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. But most have not endorsed any candidate, members of the group said. It is unusual for so many former high-level military officials and career diplomats to issue such an overtly political message during a presidential campaign. CLIP

Poll: Voters Say Iraq Didn't Merit War (June 11)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061304F.shtml
Polls Show Anti-War, Pro-Kerry Gains

Hiding a Bad Guy Named Triple X
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/issue/040621/usnews/21abughraib.htm
U.S. News and World Report - Issue dated 21 June 2004 - How the military treated some inmates at Abu Ghraib like 'ghosts'. The top U.S. commander in Iraq, Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez, issued a classified order last November directing military guards to hide a prisoner, later dubbed "Triple X" by soldiers, from Red Cross inspectors and keep his name off official rosters. The disclosure, by military sources, is the first indication that Sanchez was directly involved in efforts to hide prisoners from the Red Cross, a practice that was sharply criticized by Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba in a report describing abuses of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad. Taguba blamed the 800th Military Police Brigade, which guarded the prison, for allowing "other government agencies" - a euphemism that includes the CIA - to hide "ghost" detainees at Abu Ghraib. The practice, he wrote, "was deceptive, contrary to Army doctrine, and in violation of international law."

Sanchez Authorized Torture at Abu Ghraib (June 12)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061304A.shtml

Torture Scandal Grows and Threatens to Reach George Bush (June 11)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061204E.shtml

Torture Inc. (June 14)
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/STA406A.html
The U.S. Army has employed as many as 27 contractors to run its interrogation operations, according to media reports. But while CACI and Titan are getting all the mainstream media play, it appears that far more than 27 contract employees were involved in recruiting and placing interrogators in various locations. Some of the firms involved in the Bush administrationās "TortureGate" include an odd assortment of telecommunications companies and executive placement firms that have jumped into the lucrative torture business in Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan, Iraq and at secret locations throughout Central Asia and North Africa. Interrogators can earn up to $120,000 per year plying their trade and most are former military and law enforcement personnel. More ominously, these so-called "private military contractors" are nothing of the sort. They are paramilitary organizations that are funded by the US Department of Defense, the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of State, and assorted other agencies through contract vehicles known as Basic Ordering Agreements or "BOAs" hidden throughout the vast US government bureaucracy. It now is well known that CACI got its money through a BOA with the Department of the Interior. CLIP

Legalizing Torture (June 9)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061204H.shtml
The Bush administration assures the country, and the world, that it is complying with U.S. and international laws banning torture and maltreatment of prisoners. But, breaking with a practice of openness that had lasted for decades, it has classified as secret and refused to disclose the techniques of interrogation it is using on foreign detainees at U.S. prisons at Guantánamo Bay and in Afghanistan and Iraq. This is a matter of grave concern because the use of some of the methods that have been reported in the press is regarded by independent experts as well as some of the Pentagon's legal professionals as illegal. The administration has responded that its civilian lawyers have certified its methods as proper - but it has refused to disclose, or even provide to Congress, the justifying opinions and memos. This week, thanks again to an independent press, we have begun to learn the deeply disturbing truth about the legal opinions that the Pentagon and the Justice Department seek to keep secret. According to copies leaked to several newspapers, they lay out a shocking and immoral set of justifications for torture. CLIP

William Rivers Pitt | Nuremberg Revised
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1237589,00.html
Jason Burke charts the worldwide hidden network of prisons where more than 3,000 al-Qaeda suspects have been held without trial - and many subjected to torture - since 9/11. The United States government, in conjunction with key allies, is running an "invisible" network of prisons and detention centres into which thousands of suspects have disappeared without trace since the "war on terror" began. In the past three years, thousands of alleged militants have been transferred around the world by American, Arab and Far Eastern security services, often in secret operations that by-pass extradition laws. The astonishing traffic has seen many, including British citizens, sent from the West to countries where they can be tortured to extract information. Anything learnt is passed on to the US and, in some cases, reaches British intelligence. The disclosure of the shadowy system will increase pressure on the Bush administration over its "cavalier" approach to human rights and will embarrass Tony Blair, a staunch ally of President George Bush. The practice of "renditions" - when suspects are handed directly into the custody of another state without due process - has sparked particular anger. At least 70 such transfers have occurred, according to CIA sources. Many involve men who have been freed by the courts and are thus legally innocent. Renditions are often used when American interrogators believe that harsh treatment - banned in their own country - would produce results.

Rumsfeld's Intelligence Takeover Power Grab (June 10)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061404F.shtml
If not for the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, most Americans probably never would have heard of Stephen Cambone. For more than a year, Cambone has served as the first-ever undersecretary of defense for intelligence, but he has lived a cloistered existence at the Pentagon. During most of his infrequent public appearances on Capitol Hill, Cambone has been a silent presence hovering over the shoulder of his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. But then came Abu Ghraib. Last month, the Senate Armed Services Committee called Cambone to testify about the role military intelligence officers played in the treatment - and mistreatment - of inmates at the Iraqi prison. His testimony was less than illuminating. Cambone, the Pentagon's newly minted intelligence chief, repeatedly maintained that he was unaware of the "scope and scale" of the torture at the prison, site of perhaps the largest military intelligence operation in Iraq, until he read Major General Antonio Taguba's report in early May. This, even though investigations into the abuse had been underway for months.  (...) That closeness has led Rumsfeld to entrust Cambone with numerous tasks at the Pentagon. He spearheaded the 2001 Quadrennial Defense Review on overhauling America's defense posture. He toiled on the early 2002 Nuclear Posture Review that flirted with the idea of nuking hidden WMD facilities. And he helmed the Program Analysis and Evaluation office, where he reviewed defense programs for their utility to Rumsfeld's vision of networked, high-tech warfare. "Follow Cambone's bouncing ball - where he went and what job he had - and you see very clearly what the secretary's agenda was," says a former Defense official who worked closely with Cambone. Cambone's latest bounce may end up being his last. He was once discussed as a potential successor to Tenet, but Abu Ghraib surely makes that impossible. A report expected next month from a top Army intelligence officer, Major General George Fay, will examine the conduct of military intelligence at Abu Ghraib in greater detail, and, while Fay lacks the authority to investigate his civilian or military superiors, congressional officials say they will be reviewing Fay's findings for indications of high-level approval of the abuse, tacit or otherwise. "I wouldn't be surprised if we have [Cambone] back up" to testify, says the senior Senate Armed Services Committee staffer. But it's not Cambone - nor even Rumsfeld - who makes the office of undersecretary of defense for intelligence problematic. The problem is the office itself. The position allows the Pentagon to assert ever more influence over the nation's intelligence priorities at a time when the CIA is ill-positioned to serve as a counterweight. Tenet - the second-longest serving DCI in history - is gone, taking with him the CIA's chief of covert operations, Jim Pavitt. The new interim DCI, John McLaughlin, is a soft-spoken guy without much of a reputation for interagency combat. This summer, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the 9/11 Commission are expected to level new attacks on the CIA's recent performance. And, already, The Washington Post has wondered on its front page whether McLaughlin can "preserve[e] the CIA's status at the White House and among world leaders." If Tenet's departure leaves a "power vacuum" in the intelligence community, as The New York Times put it, Cambone and Rumsfeld are well positioned to fill it. CLIP

Congress Backs Pentagon Budget Heavy on Future Weapons (11 June 2004)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061204J.shtml
Build-up pricier than that in '80s - As Congress moves ahead with a huge new defense bill, lawmakers are making only modest changes in the Pentagon's plans to spend well over $1 trillion in the next decade on an arsenal of futuristic planes, ships and weapons with little direct connection to the Iraq war or the global war on terrorism. House and Senate versions of the 2005 defense authorization measure contain a record $68 billion for research and development - 20 percent above the peak levels of President Ronald Reagan's historic defense buildup. Tens of billions more out of a proposed $76 billion hardware account will go for big-ticket weapons systems to combat some as-yet-unknown adversary comparable to the former Soviet Union. On the Pentagon's wish list are such revolutionary weapons as a fighter plane that can land on an aircraft carrier or descend vertically to the ground; a radar-evading destroyer that can wallow low in the waves like a submarine while aiming precise rounds at enemy targets 200 miles inland; and a compact "isomer" weapon that could tap the metallic chemical element hafnium to release 10,000 times as much energy per gram as TNT. So far this year, the debate in Congress over the defense bill has largely skirted the budgetary or strategic implications of this buildup, largely because Republican and Democratic politicians are unwilling to appear weak on defense after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. CLIP

A poignant perspective of Fallujah
http://www.newswithviews.com/baldwin/baldwin186.htm
Writing for The Washington Times, Bill Gertz reported, "The Pentagon and State Department are planning to set up a 75,000- member international peacekeeping force for Africa, senior Bush administration officials told Congress yesterday." The report continued by saying,"[Deputy Secretary of State Richard] Armitage said, 'What we envision is about a 75,000- person force, starting in Africa, [for] the training of peacekeepers, people to be available for peacekeeping.' The force will cost about $660 million over five years, with 20 percent of the money coming from State Department funds and the rest from the Defense Department. The program is called the Global Peace Operations Initiative (GPOI)." The report also quoted Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz as saying, "In most cases, the U.S.-funded peacekeeping force would operate under a U.N. mandate." Wolfowitz was also quoted as saying, "an international force that could be used for peacekeeping operations would reduce 'the stresses' on U.S. forces." If anyone doubted that President G.W. Bush was a globalist who desires to merge the United States into a one-world society, this report should be more than sufficient to erase that doubt. As did his father, G.W. Bush is pushing America closer and closer to the globalist's dream of a "New World Order."

Making Votes Count (13 June 2004)
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061404L.shtml
New York Times | Editorial - Sunday Gambling on Voting - If election officials want to convince voters that electronic voting can be trusted, they should be willing to make it at least as secure as slot machines. To appreciate how poor the oversight on voting systems is, it's useful to look at the way Nevada systematically ensures that electronic gambling machines in Las Vegas operate honestly and accurately. Electronic voting, by comparison, is rife with lax procedures, security risks and conflicts of interest. (...) Election officials say their electronic voting systems are the very best. But the truth is, gamblers are getting the best technology, and voters are being given systems that are cheap and untrustworthy by comparison. There are many questions yet to be resolved about electronic voting, but one thing is clear: a vote for president should be at least as secure as a 25-cent bet in Las Vegas.

Champions of the environment
http://www.simedia.org/new/soc-econ-pol/Champions-of-environment.html
Activists on 6 continents received the 2004 Goldman Environmental

Pollution Shifting Rain Patterns in Sierra, Worldwide (10 June 2004)
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2004/06/10/state2020EDT7076.DTL
Sacramento - As he flew high above the snowy Sierra Nevada this spring, atmospheric scientist Veerabhadran Ramanathan saw confirmation of what he'd both hoped and feared to see: Big, dark storm clouds that weren't producing any rain. Air pollution appears to be altering rainfall patterns in the Sierra and around the world, said Ramanathan of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in La Jolla. It's the latest fallout from an exploding human population that over the last half-century has pushed untold tons of smog, soot and ash into the atmosphere, he said Thursday at the nation's first state-sponsored global warming research program. The vast sprawl of Los Angeles, with its millions of cars pumping greenhouse gases into the air, are in effect driving away the very rainfall its population needs to survive as pollution forces rain to fall outside the state. Instead of accumulating as snow in California's Sierra, a smaller amount lands in neighboring Nevada. Ramanathan co-led a 1999 study that reported the existence of a vast "brown cloud" of pollution, dust and chemicals that he believes is slowing solar evaporation from the oceans and leading to a net reduction in world rainfall. It's part of a band of pollution encircling the globe, helping produce a 10-20 percent reduction in the amount of sunlight reaching the earth over the last 50 years. The phenomenon cools the earth's surface, but heats the middle atmosphere. Minuscule flecks of black carbon make up perhaps only 10 percent of the pollution cloud, but play a dominant role in altering the way the atmosphere behaves, Ramanathan said. The dark particles absorb solar radiation and scatter sunlight, helping produce that characteristic haze that today coats not only cities like Los Angeles but once-pristine areas like Yosemite National Park downwind. They also form the nucleus that attracts cloud moisture into water droplets. Clouds are getting thicker and darker because they retain more moisture, adding to the darkening effect on the earth below. When enough moisture accumulates around natural dust particles - clouds of which have been circling the globe for eons - the droplets fall as rain. But Ramanathan said the carbon specks are often too small to produce drops big enough to hit the ground. CLIP




1.

From: "Stephen Kaplan" kap808@mcihispeed.net>
Subject: Bush's Psychiatric Profile: He is a Certifiable Madman
Date: 11 Jun 2004

Jean:

I thought you might like to see a sophisticated psychological profile of George Bush which a friend of mine, Paul Levy, has written. I'm sending two versions: 1) a short version, reproduced below, and 2)a much longer analysis, to which you can refer your readers if you place it on your web site.

This well-thought-out look at Bush's dangerous illness deserves wide circulation. What is interesting about it is that it does not exempt us but points out how we are part of the problem.

---

BUSH'S UNIQUE PSYCHIATRIC PATHOLOGY

I would like to speak the marginalized voice. This voice is often joked about, but it is deadly serious. It is like there is an elephant in the living room, and no one is talking about it. It is exactly like the emperor has no clothes, and no one is saying the obvious. Situations like this literally demand to be pointed out, to be named. There is a field of fear and cover-up that gets constellated around someone like Bush that inhibits people from speaking the truth. This is analogous to how people were afraid to disagree with Bush after 9/11 for fear of being called terrorists. ("You're either with us, or you're a terrorist.") But the truth needs to be uttered.

George W. Bush is ill. He has a very peculiar, insidious and malignant psychiatric disorder. I know this psychiatric disorder well because my father suffered from the exact same condition. There are a number of ways of describing it, as it is a multi-faceted complex whose underlying dynamic is to resist, at all costs, self-reflecting and seeing what his real situation is. What is scary is that part of his illness is his willingness to do everything and anything to hold on to the position of power that he is in, as he is addicted to the temptation of power. He is also unable to genuinely accept responsibility for his actions, always blaming others. His illness is sociopathic in nature. Due to the deep split in his nature which has led him to project the shadow, instead of being one with himself (whole, holy), he is literally "besides himself," which is another way of saying that he is out of his mind. There is no sense in editing and diluting what I am trying to say, beating around the bush, so to speak. The President of the United States is a certifiable madman. And yet, he has a certain sort of coherence and charisma that can entrance those who don't see through his subterfuge. It makes me think of the great Thomas Merton, who commented on the case of the obviously demented Nazi, Adolf Eichmann, "One of the most disturbing facts that came out in the Eichmann trial was that a psychiatrist examined him and pronounced him perfectly sane." 

Psychologically speaking, one facet of Bush's condition is what is called "malignant narcissism." This is a narcissist who reacts to others who don't support and enable their narcissism, with sadism. In my lifetime I have never seen so many books come out by past members of this very administration that are holding up the mirror and reflecting Bush's shadow (too bad Bush doesn't read books), and the Bush administration always reacts by trying to destroy the messenger, just like a mean-spirited, malignant narcissist. Malignant narcissists have contempt for anyone who disagrees with them (as it threatens their narcissism), as well as having contempt for the rule of law (which they, in their narcissism, believe they are above). Professor Sulak Sivaraksa likens Bush to two other malignant narcissists, Hitler and Stalin. Sivaraksa argues that Bush's declaration of an "axis of Evil," Hitler's "Final Solution," and Stalin's "pogrom of peasants" were actually analogous attempts "to perfect the world by destroying the (perceived) impurities." Another modern day malignant narcissist is none other than Saddam Hussein!
The great German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche's talked about a condition that he called the "pale criminal," which is a chillingly accurate description of Bush, and helps to even more fill out his psychiatric profile. Jung felt that the pale criminal idea of Nietzsche was so profound that he referred to it in articulating a particular type of personality disorder. To quote Jung, the pale criminal "simply will not and cannot admit the he is what he is; he cannot endure his own guilt, just as he could not help incurring it. He will stoop to every kind of self-deception if only he can escape the sight of himself... which consists essentially in one hand not knowing what the other is doing, in wanting to JUMP OVER ONE’S OWN SHADOW, AND IN LOOKING FOR EVRYTHING DARK, INFERIOR AND CULPABLE IN OTHERS... but since nobody can jump out of his skin and be rid of himself, they stand in their own way everywhere as their own evil spirit." Jung continues that the pale criminal's unconscious identification with one side of the polarity, his "God Almightiness, that is to say all those qualities which are peculiar to fools and madmen and therefore lead to catastrophe, merely fills him with arrogance and arouses everything evil in him. It produces a diabolical caricature of man, and this inhuman mask is so unendurable, such a torture to wear, that he tortures others disrupts the laws of humanity, and sins against all the rules of the human community; ...he has to keep his crime secret... he is the most violent breaker of the bond of the human community."

Nietzsche referred to it as "pale" criminal because the person would have their breath taken away and become pale at the sight of (their unconscious shadow self) in the mirror. It is not my habit to diagnose and pathologize people, but in this case it is both necessary and a relief. With the Bush administration, it is as if a bunch of criminals have co-opted our government. They should be tried for war crimes. Or put in psychiatric prisons. At the very least they should not be allowed to run the country. We, as a people, need to recognize the severity of the danger our country is in, and act.

At the root of Bush's whole process was an unwillingness and inability to experience his own sense of sin, of guilt, and of shame. He was clearly unable to experience his own weakness and vulnerability, his own sense of failure. This threatened his narcissism too much. By being unwilling to look at and experience his own darker half, he dissociates and projects out the shadow onto others, which is the very impulse of the split and traumatized soul. He then lies to himself and others, and begins to believe his own lies, which has a very mesmerizing effect on the listener. This entire process, combined with his complete unwillingness to self-reflect is the very dynamic which drafts him into being an agent for the deepest evil to enact itself through him. By being unwilling to experience his shame he shames, and curses (like a demon) the entire world.

It is important to name this situation. Bush is suffering from a peculiar manifestation of delusional, hysterical mental illness that is self-perpetuating in nature. We can call it PCMNTD - Pale Criminal/Malignant Narcissist Trauma Disorder. It should be entered into the DSM IV, the psychiatric diagnostic manual, immediately. The prescription - a good, long rest. 

Keep up the good work,

Steve

---

NOTE FROM JEAN: Here are the first 3 pages of this excellent essay...


BUSH'S PSYCHIATRIC PROFILE: HE'S CERTIFIABLE

by Paul Levy

One good thing I can say about President Bush is that he's gotten me interested in politics. Before he came to office, I was mainly interested in spiritual matters, and considered politics a "distraction." There was something that I noticed getting played out through George W. Bush as president, though, that really got my attention. I was having a reaction to, and being triggered by something in him. In his campaign he promised us a foreign policy with humility, and yet, his actions seemed so arrogant, so full of hubris. I was sensing a deep incongruity in him, like there was some unfinished psychological process that he was unconsciously playing out. The problem was, though, that because of his position, his unconscious was playing itself out and being dramatized on the world stage, where it was negatively affecting the lives of billions of people. I saw that he was unwittingly evoking and literally creating more of the very situation that he was claiming to be fighting against. It was as if he was fighting against his own shadow, which is a battle that can never be won. There seemed an element of craziness in it. 

I would like here to speak forth the marginalized voice. This voice is often joked about, but it is deadly serious. It is like there is an elephant in the living room, and more and more people are pointing at it. The emperor has no clothes, and people are noticing. Situations like this literally demand to be named. There is a field of fear and cover-up that gets constellated around someone like George Bush that inhibits people from speaking the truth. This is analogous to how people were afraid to disagree with Bush after 9/11 for fear of being called terrorists. ("You're either with us, or you're with the terrorists.") But the truth needs to be uttered.

George W. Bush is ill. He has a sickness of the soul, a psycho-spiritual dis-ease which is very prevalent and symptomatic of the times we live in. Because it is an illness that is in the soul of all humanity, and because he seems like such a "regular guy," it is very hard to recognize. The fact that Bush is sick might be a shock to some, but when you simply look at what I am pointing out, it is not hard to see. And once you get in focus what I am describing, it is easy to see it from then on, because it is so obvious. This is why most people miss it. It might involve changing your perception in a radical way, or maybe simply recognizing that these words articulate what so many of us experience and know in our hearts, but never had the words for. 

I know this disorder intimately well because my father suffered from the exact same condition. Dealing with this illness in my father almost killed me, but because of my ordeal, I have unique insight into its dynamics. There are a number of ways of describing it, as it is a multi-faceted complex whose underlying, self-generating dynamic is to resist, at all costs, self-reflecting. At the root of this process is a deep dissociation, where the person splits-off from their own darker half and projects the shadow "out there," and then contracts against and tries to destroy their own dis-owned shadow. To quote C. G. Jung, one of the greatest psychologist of the twentieth century," The psychological rule says that when an inner situation is not made conscious, it happens outside, as fate. That is to say, when the individual remains undivided (not in touch with both the light AND dark parts of themselves) and does not become conscious of his inner opposite, the world must perforce act out the conflict and be torn into opposing halves."

It is not that the threat of terrorism is not real, but that Bush's policies in dealing with terrorism are actually putting fuel on the fire. The way Bush is fighting terrorism is actually the very act which is invoking and creating more of it in the first place. Talking about Bush's policies on terrorism and his pre-emptive invasion of Iraq, Al Gore says, "Instead of making it better, he has made it infinitely worse. We are less safe because of his policies. He has created more anger and righteous indignation against us as Americans than any leader of our country in the 228 years of our existence as a nation……He has exposed Americans abroad and Americans in every U.S. town and city to a greater danger of attack by terrorists because of his arrogance, willfullness, and bungling." Iraq, instead of being, as Bush declared, "the central front in the war on terror," has now become, as Gore points out, "the central recruiting office for terrorists." Gore continues, "the unpleasant truth is that President Bush's utter incompetence has made the world a far more dangerous place and dramatically increased the threat of terrorism against the United States." As the International Institute for Strategic Studies points out, the Iraq conflict "has arguably focused the energies and resources of Al Qaeda and its followers while diluting those of the global counterterrorism coalition."

Bush is not in conscious relationship to a part of himself, which is then possessing him from behind, beneath his conscious awareness, and enacting itself through him. By disassociating from his own shadow and projecting it onto a supposed "other," and wanting to destroy the other, he has become possessed by the very same darkness he is trying to destroy, just perpetuating the never-ending cycle of violence. It is truly a diabolical, infinitely-regressing, self-perpetuating, closed, negative feedback loop that is completely inverted and crazy-making. This is the repetition compulsion of the traumatized soul gone awry, to daemonic proportions. In the repetition compulsion, the way the person tries to resolve their trauma is the very act which recreates it. To err is human, to persevere ("stay the course") in error is truly diabolical.

By projecting the shadow, to again quote Jung, "it deprives us of the capacity to deal with evil." Jung stresses the importance of consciously developing what he calls one's "imagination for evil," which is to consciously recognize one's potential for evil and integrate one's dark side into one's wholeness, which includes both light and dark. If we have no imagination for evil, to quote Jung, "evil has us in its grip…….for only the fool can permanently disregard the conditions of his own nature. In fact, this negligence is the best means of making him an instrument of evil."

By projecting the shadow, Bush is unwittingly being a conduit for the deepest, archetypal evil to possess him and act itself out through him. At the same time, ironically enough, he is identified with the light and imagining that he is divinely inspired. He then believe that any action he desires is justified in the name of God, as he can rationalize it as being God's will. This is a very dangerous situation, as Bush has become identified with and possessed by the hero, or saviour archetype. This figure is religious in nature, as it derives from the transpersonal, archetypal dimension of the collective unconscious. Being inflated with the hero archetype, he (archetypically) wants to save the world from evil and liberate the planet.

This behavior is symptomatic of the religious right, which Bush is now recognized to be the leader of, as well as fundamentalism (be it Christian or Moslem, or whatever form this polarization takes). They identify with only one side of the polarity (the light), and are fanatically convinced of the rightness of their viewpoint, which they consider non-negotiable. People who disagree with them are seen as threats and agents of the Devil, who need to be destroyed. Could it be there is a deep sense of insecurity, of dis-ease, about the fundamentalist's fanatically held beliefs? The fundamentalist splits-off from, and projects outside of themselves (and actually dreams up into materialization) their dis-owned shadow, in the form of the Devil (one of whose inner meaning, besides "the liar," is "the adversary"). And then they try to kill the adversary, or "enemy combatant," who is seen to be the Devil incarnate. But fighting the Devil is radically different than loving God.

Bush's illness is sociopathic in nature. By projecting the shadow, he is genuinely unable to accept responsibility for his actions, always scapegoating and blaming others. Denial is a key part of his arsenal, and it is so pervasive and insidious that he doesn't even know he's in denial (he's in denial that he's in denial…..). He is truly unconscious, as if he is dreaming. In addition, this kind of denial cultivates an infinite web of deceit that is always hiding from itself. If a single individual was acting out an analogous inner process in their life that Bush is enacting on the world stage, they would be diagnosed with having a schizoid, dissociative disorder, with self-destructive tendencies. Due to the deep split in his nature which has led him to so steadfastly project the shadow, instead of being one with himself (whole), President Bush is literally "beside himself." 


CLIP - Read the rest of this very interesting analysis (8 more pages to go) at http://www.EarthRainbowNetwork.com/Archives2004/Bushschizoid.htm




2.

From: http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_061104C.shtml

Administration Lawyers Ascribed Broad Power to Bush on Torture

By David G. Savage and Richard B. Schmitt
Los Angeles Times

10 June 2004

In a memo dated weeks after the invasion of Iraq, administration counsel said the president's authority superceded Congress'.

Washington - On the eve of the war in Iraq, Bush administration lawyers spelled out a strikingly broad view of the president's power that freed the commander in chief and U.S. military from the federal law and international treaties that barred the use of torture.

In past wars, presidents have claimed special powers. During the Civil War, President Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and allowed accused traitors to be tried before military courts. Shortly after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued an order authorizing the military to intern thousands of Japanese Americans.

In those instances, however, the president acted with the approval of Congress. Rarely, if ever, have the president's advisors claimed an authority to ignore the law as written by Congress.

The legal memo, written last year for the Defense Department and disclosed this week, did not speak for President Bush, but it claimed an extraordinary power for him. It said that as the commander in chief, he had a "constitutionally superior position" to Congress and an "inherent authority" to prosecute the war, even if it meant defying the will of Congress.

Congress adopted an anti-torture law in 1994 that barred Americans abroad acting under U.S. authority from inflicting "severe physical or mental pain."

But the 56-page memo on "Detainee Interrogation in the Global War on Terrorism" maintains that the president and his military commander cannot be restrained in this way.

"Congress lacks authority - to set the terms and conditions under which the president may exercise his authority as commander in chief to control the conduct of operations during a war," the memo asserts. "Congress may no more regulate the president's ability to detain and interrogate enemy combatants than it may regulate his ability to direct troop movements on the battlefield. Accordingly, we would construe [the law] to avoid this difficulty and conclude that it does not apply to the president's detention and interrogation of enemy combatants."

The memo was dated March 6, 2003, two weeks before the start of the war in Iraq. In earlier memos, administration lawyers said the president could designate even American citizens arrested within the United States as "enemy combatants," and thus theoretically subject them to torture.

But according to several mainstream legal scholars, this turns the Constitution on its head. The 18th century document says Congress makes the laws, and the president has the duty to carry them out.

"He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed," the Constitution says of the president.

Moreover, the Constitution grants Congress specific powers to set the rules in war and peace, including for captives.

"Congress shall have the power - to declare war and make rules concerning captures on land and water - to define offenses against the law of nations [and] to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces."

A broad range of legal experts, including specialists in military law, say they were taken aback by this bald assertion of presidential supremacy.

"It is an extraordinary claim. It is as broad an assertion of presidential authority as I have ever seen," said Michael Glennon, a war law expert at Tufts University. "This is a claim of unlimited executive power. There is no reason to read the commander-in-chief power as trumping the clear power of Congress."

University of Texas law professor Douglas Laycock added, "It can't be right. It is just wrong to say the president can do whatever he wants, even if it is against the law."

Veteran military lawyers also said they were surprised and dismayed by the memo.

"It's an argument I have never seen made before - that the commander in chief's war-fighting powers trump the restrictions in the Geneva Convention," said Grant Lattin, a former judge advocate for the Marines who practices military law in Virginia. "I am having a difficult time even following the logic, that somehow because this is a new type of war that these military commanders' authority has somehow grown larger than the restrictions that we have accepted in the Geneva Convention."

Retired Rear Adm. John Hutson, the former judge advocate general for the Navy, said the memo read as though the lawyers were trying to bend the law to benefit their client, rather than stating the law fairly and accurately.

"That is not the job of people advising the president or the attorney general or the secretary of Defense. They have to be right legally, and I think they have an obligation to be right morally. I think they failed on both counts," said Hutson, now dean of the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord, N.H.

"The argument proves too much," he added. "If the president's inherent authority as commander in chief trumps domestic and international law, where is the limit? If every sovereign can ignore the law, then no one is bound by it."

It is not clear who wrote the memo or what effect it had. This week, administration officials, including Atty. Gen John Ashcroft, insisted that U.S. officials did not condone or authorize the use of torture. They characterized the memo as a view presented by lawyers in the administration that was not put into practice.

In 2002, the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel took the lead in arguing for a broad view of presidential authority in the war on terrorism. The same office contributed to the Pentagon's "working group" memo.

The office was led by two conservative law professors, Jay S. Bybee and John C. Yoo. They wrote the key memos declaring the Geneva Convention did not apply to accused terrorists, the Taliban or other detainees who were held at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

They also said the president had the power to arrest and hold in military custody American citizens who were deemed to be "enemy combatants." The administration cited this authority as the basis for holding Jose Padilla, an accused terrorist who was arrested at Chicago's O'Hare Airport.

The Supreme Court is considering Padilla's case and is expected to rule on it before the end of June.

Bybee and Yoo have left the government. Bush nominated Bybee as a judge on the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, and March 14, 2003, he won confirmation by the Senate. Yoo, a former clerk to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, has returned to his position as a law professor at UC Berkeley.

The Pentagon's legal working group was chaired by the Defense Department's general counsel, William J. Haynes II. He too has been nominated to be an appellate judge, in the U.S. 4th Circuit in Richmond, Va.

In March, the Republican-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee narrowly approved his nomination, but he has not been brought up for a final vote in the Senate.

A year ago, Haynes told Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) that he and the Pentagon opposed any use of torture.

"We can assure you that it is the policy of the United States to comply with all of its legal obligation in its treatment of detainees," he said in a letter citing the Geneva Convention and the anti-torture law. "The United States does not permit, tolerate or condone any such torture by its employees under any circumstances."

The letter, dated June 25, 2003, came three months after the secret memo argued that the president could employ the use of torture if he chose to do so.

---

See also:

And HERE IS 'THAT [smoking gun]MEMO' which Ashcroft does not want to turn over
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/printer_061104C.shtml
Full Text of March 6, 2003 Defense Department Memo regarding justification for torturing suspected terrorists - Also available in pdf format at http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/pdf/military_0604.pdf

Bush Defends Torture in the Name of National Security (June 9)
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=04/06/09/1444252




3.

From: "CURE" contact@earthcure.org>
Subject: Reasons behind resignations of Tenet and Pavitt
Date: 11 Jun 2004 08:

Hi All,

Here is an article on the resignations of Tenet and Pavitt with anticipated other resignations to follow (article below this message). I think the important thing to ask is "What would prompt these resignations?" My vote is on NESARA being announced.

I know a lot of people are concerning themselves with HOW NESARA could happen. As in most things in life, it is not up to us to know the how, only to have the desire and forget about it, allowing the Universe to work its every moment miracles. Such is the case with NESARA. It will "right" a lot of the "wrongs".

So let's focus our energy on the announcement and the wonderful days that will follow. Picture what it will be like sitting in front of your TV watching someone like Greenspan announce NESARA and have selected officials one by one stand up explaining how it came about and what it will mean to the average citizen. Visualize the reaction from reporters, both positive and negative with the negative ones looking ridiculous. The positive reactions will be joyous and be filled with a sense of relief.

Visualize. Put energy behind the outcome. Know that all things are possible. GO NESARA!

Love & Light,
Samone Michaels
Director, CURE
http://www.earthcure.org

~*~

From: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060804_coup_detat.html

COUP D'ETAT: The Real Reason Tenet and Pavitt Resigned from the CIA on June 3rd and 4th

Bush, Cheney Indictments in Plame Case Looming

by Michael C. Ruppert

additional reporting by Wayne Madsen from Washington

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/

JUNE 8, 2004 1600 PDT (FTW) - Why did DCI George Tenet suddenly resign on June 3rd, only to be followed a day later by James Pavitt, the CIA's Deputy Director of Operations (DDO)?

The real reasons, contrary to the saturation spin being put out by major news outlets, have nothing to do with Tenet's role as taking the fall for alleged 9/11 and Iraqi intelligence "failures" before the upcoming presidential election.

Both resignations, perhaps soon to be followed by resignations from Colin Powell and his deputy Richard Armitage, are about the imminent and extremely messy demise of George W. Bush and his Neocon administration in a coup d'etat being executed by the Central Intelligence Agency. The coup, in the planning for at least two years, has apparently become an urgent priority as a number of deepening crises threaten a global meltdown.

Based upon recent developments, it appears that long-standing plans and preparations leading to indictments and impeachment of Bush, Cheney and even some senior cabinet members have been accelerated, possibly with the intent of removing or replacing the entire Bush regime prior to the Republican National Convention this August.

FTW has been documenting this Watergate-like coup for more than fifteen months and almost everything we will discuss about recent events was predicted by us in the following pages: Please see our stories

"The Perfect Storm - Part I" (March 2003);
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/031903_perfect_storm_1.html

"Blood in the Water" (July 2003)
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/071503_watergate_II.html

"Beyond Bush - Part I" (July 2003)
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070103_beyond_bush_1.html

"Waxman Ties Evidentiary Noose Around Rice and Cheney" (July 2003)
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/073103_waxman_noose.html

"Beyond Bush - Part II" (October 2003)
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/102003_beyond_bush_2.html


There were two things we didn't get right. One was the timing. We predicted the developments taking place now as likely to happen after the November election, not before. Secondly, we did not foresee the sudden resignations of Tenet and Pavitt. Understanding the resignations is the key to understanding a deteriorating world scene and that America is on the precipice of a presidential and constitutional crisis that will ultimately dwarf the removal of Richard Nixon in 1974.

So why did Tenet and Pavitt resign? We'll explain why and we will provide many clues along the way as we make our case.

HIGH CRIMES AND REALLY STUPID MOVES

Shortly after the "surprise" Tenet-Pavitt resignations, current and former senior members of the U.S. intelligence community and the Justice Department told journalist Wayne Madsen, a former Naval intelligence officer, that they were directly connected to the criminal investigation of a 2003 White House leak that openly exposed Valerie Plame as an undercover CIA officer. What received less attention was that the leak also destroyed a long-term CIA proprietary intelligence gathering operation which, as we will see, was of immense importance to US strategic interests at a critical moment.

The leak was a vindictive retaliation for statements, reports and actions taken by Plame's husband, former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, which had deeply embarrassed the Bush administration and exposed it to possible charges for impeachable offenses, including lying to the American people about an alleged (and totally unfounded) nuclear threat posed by Iraq's Saddam Hussein. Conservative columnist Robert Novak, the beneficiary of the leak, immediately published it on July 14, 2003 and Valerie Plame's career (at least the covert part) instantly ended. The actual damage caused by that leak has never been fully appreciated.

Wilson deeply embarrassed almost every senior member of the Bush junta by proving to the world that they were consciously lying about one of their most important justifications for invading Iraq: namely, their claim to have had certain knowledge, based on "good and reliable" intelligence, that Hussein was on the brink of deploying a nuclear weapon, possibly inside the United States. It was eventually disclosed that the "intelligence" possessed by the administration was a set of poorly forged documents on letterhead from the government of Niger, which described attempts by Iraq to purchase yellowcake uranium for a nuclear weapons program.

It has since been established by Scott Ritter and others that Iraq's nuclear weapons program had been dead in the water and non-functioning since the first Iraq war.

Wilson was secretly dispatched in February 2002, on instructions from Dick Cheney to the CIA, to go to Niger and look for anything that might support the material in the documents. They had already been dismissed as forgeries by the International Atomic Energy Agency, the CIA, and apparently everyone else who had seen them. The CIA cautioned the administration, more than once, against using them. Shortly thereafter, Wilson returned and gave his report stating clearly that the allegations were pure bunk and unsupportable.

In spite of this, unaware of the booby traps laid all around them, the entire power core of the Bush administration jumped on the Niger documents as on a battle horse and charged off into in a massive public relations blitz. Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld, Powell, Wolfowitz and others - to varying degrees - insisted, testified, and swore that they knew, and had reliable, credible and verified intelligence that Saddam was about to deploy an actual nuclear device built from the Niger yellowcake.

It was full court media press and they successfully scared the pants off of most Americans who believed that Saddam was going to nuke them any second.

George Bush made the charge and actually cited the documents in his 2003 State-of-the-Union address, even after he had been cautioned by George Tenet not to rely on them. In a major speech at the United Nations, Colin Powell charged that Iraq was on the verge of deploying a nuke and had been trying to acquire uranium. Dick Cheney charged in several speeches that Saddam was capable of nuclear terror. And shortly before the invasion, when asked in a television interview whether there was sufficient proof and advance warning of the Iraqi nuclear threat, a smug and confident Condoleezza Rice quipped, "If we wait for a smoking gun, that smoking gun may be a mushroom cloud over an American city." Rice was lying through her teeth.

By July of 2003, as the Iraqi invasion was proving to be a protracted and ill-conceived debacle, executed in spite of massive resistance from within military, political, diplomatic and economic cadres, there was growing disgust within many government circles about the way the Bush administration was running things. The mention of Wilson's report came in July though his name was not disclosed. It suggested corroborative evidence of criminal, rather than stupid, behavior by the administration. The San Francisco Chronicle reported:

A senior CIA official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the intelligence agency informed the White House on March 9, 2002 - 10 months before Bush's nationally televised speech - that an agency source who had traveled to Niger could not confirm European intelligence reports that Iraq was attempting to buy uranium from the West African country.

Note the reference to an Agency source.

It was inevitable that Wilson would move from no comment, to statements given on condition of anonymity, and finally into the public spotlight. That he did, in a July 6th New York Times Editorial titled "What I Didn't Find in Africa." Soon he was giving interviews everywhere.

On July 14th Novak published the column outing Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame. As a result, any criminal investigation of the Plame leak will also go into the Niger documents and any crimes committed which are materially related to Plame's exposure.

Instead of retreating, Wilson advanced. In September he went public, writing editorials and granting interviews which thoroughly exposed the Bush administration's criminal use of the documents, Cheney's lies about the mission, and all the other lies used to deceive the American people into war.

At the moment he went on the record, Wilson became another legally admissible, corroborative evidentiary source; a witness available for subpoena and deposition, ready to give testimony to the high crimes and misdemeanors he has witnessed.

First Clue: James Pavitt was Valerie Plame's boss. So was George Tenet.

CLIP - Read the whole article at http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/060804_coup_detat.html

Last and final clue: Under Executive Privilege, a principle intended to protect the constitutional separation of powers, officials in the Executive Branch cannot give testimony in a legal case against a sitting President. The Bush administration has invoked or threatened to invoke the privilege several times. Dick did it over the secret records of his energy task force and George Bush tried to use it to prevent Condoleezza Rice from testifying before the "Independent" Commission investigating September 11th.

Former officials of the Executive Branch are, however, free to testify if they are no longer holding a government office when subpoenaed or when the charges are brought.

(To learn more about Executive Privilege visit http://www.findlaw.com/)

The Bush administration has proved itself to be an insular group of inept, dishonest and dangerous CEO's of the corporation known as America. They have become very bad for business and the Board of Directors is now taking action. Make no mistake, the CIA works for "The Board" - Wall Street and big money. The long-term (very corrupt and unethical) agenda of the Board, in the face of multiple worsening global crises, was intended to proceed far beyond the initially destructive war in Iraq, toward an effective reconstruction and a strategic response to Peak Oil. But the neocons have stalled at the ugly stage: killing hundreds of thousands of people; destroying Iraq's industrial and cultural infrastructure as their own bombs and other people's RPGs blow everything up; getting caught running torture camps; and making the whole world intensely dislike America.

These jerks are doing real damage to their masters' interests.

But (not surprisingly) Tenet and the CIA were and remain much better at covert operations and planning ahead than the Bush administration ever was. Tenet and Pavitt actually prepared and left a clear, irrefutable and incriminating paper trail which not only proves that they had shunned and refused to endorse the documents, the CIA also did not support the nuke charges and warned Bush not to use them.

Where are those documents now? They're part of the Justice Department Plame investigation - and they're also in the hands of the Congressman who will most likely introduce and manage the articles of impeachment, if that becomes necessary: Henry Waxman (D), of California. If you would like to see how tightly the legal trap has been prepared, and how carefully the evidence has been laid out, I suggest taking a look around Waxman's web site at: http://www.house.gov/waxman/.

THE SWARM

There are a multitude of signs that the Bush administration is being "swarmed" in what is becoming a feeding frenzy as opposition is surfacing from many places inside the government, including the military. The signs are not hard to find.

The June 3rd issue of Capitol Hill Blue, the newspaper published for members of Congress, bore the headline "Bush Knew About Leak of CIA Operative's Name". That article virtually guaranteed that the Plame investigation had enough to pursue Bush criminally. The story's lead sentence described a criminal, prosecutable offense: "Witnesses told a federal grand jury President George W. Bush knew about, and took no action to stop, the release of a covert CIA operative's name to a journalist in an attempt to discredit her husband, a critic of administration policy in Iraq."

A day later, on June 4th Capitol Hill Blue took another hard shot at the administration. Titled "Bush's Erratic Behavior Worries White House Aides", the story's first four paragraphs say everything.

President George W. Bush's increasingly erratic behavior and wide mood swings has the halls of the West Wing buzzing lately as aides privately express growing concern over their leader's state of mind.

In meetings with top aides and administration officials, the President goes from quoting the Bible in one breath to obscene tantrums against the media, Democrats and others that he classifies as "enemies of the state."

Worried White House aides paint a portrait of a man on the edge, increasingly wary of those who disagree with him and paranoid of a public that no longer trusts his policies in Iraq or at home.

"It reminds me of the Nixon days," says a longtime GOP political consultant with contacts in the White House. "Everybody is an enemy; everybody is out to get him. That's the mood over there."

The attacks have not stopped. On June 8th, the same paper followed with another story headlined, "Lawyers Told Bush He Could Order Suspects Tortured".

Journalist Wayne Madsen, a Washington veteran with excellent access to many sources has indicated for this story that the Neocons have few remaining friends anywhere. All of this is consistent with a CIA-led coup.

Ahmed Chalabi

Madsen reported that the Plame probe comes amid another high-level probe of Pentagon officials for leaking classified National Security Agency cryptologic information to Iran via Iraqi National Congress head Ahmed Chalabi. FBI agents have polygraphed and interviewed a number of civilian political appointees in the Pentagon in relation to the intelligence leak, said to have severely disrupted the National Security Agency's ability to listen in on encrypted Iranian diplomatic and intelligence communications.

Chalabi's leak has once again forced Iran to change equipment, resulting in impaired U.S. intelligence gathering of Iran's sensitive communications. The probe into the Chalabi leak is centering on Pentagon officials who have been close to Chalabi, including Office of Net Assessment official Harold Rhode, Director of Policy and Plans officials Douglas Feith and William Luti, Undersecretary for Intelligence Stephen Cambone, and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz. In addition, some former Pentagon advisers are also targeted in the probe.

Many press reports throughout 2003 indicated that Chalabi, distrusted and virtually discarded by the CIA, had been resurrected and inserted into the Iraqi political mix on the orders of Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and the other Neocons listed above.

Abu Ghraib and Torture

A former CIA official told Madsen that between the Plame leak and the Abu Ghraib torture affair, the Bush administration is facing something that will be "worse than Watergate."

PLANNING FOR SUCCESSION

If both Bush and Cheney are removed or resign, what happens? Madsen reported that lobbyists and political consultants in Washington are dusting off their copies of the Constitution and checking the line of presidential succession.

One lobbyist said he will soon pay a call on Alaska Republican Senator Ted Stevens, who, as President pro tem of the Senate, is second in line to House Speaker Dennis Hastert to become President in the event Bush and Cheney both go.

It is one of the greatest ironies of the Plame affair that the Bush administration, spawned and nurtured by oil, might have committed suicide by vindictively, cruelly and unthinkingly exacting personal retribution on an intelligence officer who had committed no offense, and who was, quite possibly, providing the administration with critical oil-related intelligence which the President needed to manage our shaky economy and affairs of state for a while longer to squeak through to re-election. In our opinion, nothing better epitomizes the true nature of the Neocons.

That being said, they have to go. FTW wishes that it was as certain that what will come after them will be better.




4.

Forwarded by "Mark Graffis" mgraffis@vitelcom.net> on June 10

Richard Heinberg thinks we may have already drunk too deep.

From: http://www.metroactive.com/papers/sonoma/06.09.04/oil-0424.html

Oil Gone

If peak oil theorists are correct, our dependence on oil is not only foolish, it's lethal. Does modern civilization have just two choices--change or perish?

By R. V. Scheide

No blood for oil!" antiwar activists cried worldwide in the months leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March, 2003. Their pleas fell mainly on deaf ears, dismissed by various government officials and media pundits who assured Americans that in the wake of 9-11, U.S. foreign policy had become far too complex to sum up in such a simple, outdated slogan. "No blood for oil!" the activists doggedly insisted, drowned out by the technological thunder of shock and awe.

That might have been the last the general public heard of the phrase if not for an unexpected turn of events that began not long after President George W. Bush crowed "mission accomplished" on the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln one year ago: the price of oil began rising, and gasoline followed suit. Heading into Memorial Day weekend this year--the second-largest driving holiday of the year in the United States--the average price for a gallon of regular grade gasoline in had climbed 58 cents to $2.05 per gallon, the highest in two decades.

What a difference half a buck per gallon makes! Oil was back in the news. The financial community panicked. Supply shortages and reduced refinery capacity were pushing prices up; analysts warned that any long-term rise in prices would threaten the global economy's fledgling recovery. Saudi Arabia, already pumping millions of gallons per day beyond its quota, promised to pump even more to increase supply, but the price still gushed to nearly $40 per barrel. That didn't deter a record number of Americans, including an estimated 4 million Californians, from hitting the road for the holiday weekend.

As travelers settled down to family barbecues, terrorists linked to al Qaida attacked an oil-industry compound in Saudi Arabia, murdering 22 Western employees housed at the facility and casting doubt on the security of Saudi oil fields. No production facilities were damaged, but by the end of the first trading day after the attack, oil had jumped a record $2.45 during the session, reaching $42.33 per barrel and showing no signs of slowing its ascent.

Suddenly, after the terrorist attack, "No blood for oil!" didn't sound quite so silly. Almost overnight, mainstream media discovered a global oil shortage. The media have yet to state a direct connection between the shortage and the blood that's currently being spilled in Iraq, but it's getting warmer.

In recent weeks, major outlets including CNN, the New York Times and National Geographic have run prominent features on "peak oil theory," until recently a little-known concept outside the circles of petroleum-industry geologists and hardcore conservationists. The theory's implications are literally nothing short of apocalyptic, which makes its recent dissemination by such mainstream sources even more worrisome. No blood for oil? If the peak oil theorists are correct, we are about to enter an age that makes that price seem like a bargain. In fact, this age may already be upon us.

CLIP

Oil Gets in Your Blood

Peak oil theory is one of those subjects that just gets into certain people's blood. When someone with a willingness to test the truth of his own convictions tackles the subject, obsession often ensues. Santa Rosa resident Mark Savinar is a case in point.

A year ago Savinar, 25, had just completed law school and was waiting for the results of his bar exam. While researching on the Internet the role of drug money in the global economy, he ran across a reference to peak oil theory. Intrigued, he studied more and suddenly everything fell into place: the 9-11 terrorist attacks, the invasion of Iraq, the whole war on terrorism. "Oil made it all make sense," he says over orange juice at a downtown Santa Rosa cafe.

Savinar gathered some of the research he'd collected and posted it on his website, expecting to get maybe 10 hits from likeminded visitors. He got 800 visits the first week and a $250 donation. "This is what I should be doing," he said to himself. He passed the bar, but he'd already found a new calling: preaching the peak oil gospel on the Internet. Instead of entering law practice, he built up his website, and now http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net is the top linked peak oil site on Google.

"I wasn't going to hitch my wagon to something that wasn't going to be around," Savinar says, underscoring just how seriously he believes the oil crash is coming--there will be no need for lawyers after civilization collapses. His mission is to prepare as many people as he can for the catastrophe to come.

Savinar doesn't ask readers to take just his word for it. In addition to providing links to reputable peak oil research, he includes quotes from members of the Bush administration who fully acknowledge that the crisis is coming, if it's not here already.

"The situation is desperate," Bush energy advisor Matthew Simmons said in an interview with online magazine From the Wilderness in August 2003. "This is the world's biggest serious question." Asked if it was time to include peak oil in public policy debates, Simmons said, "It is past time. As I have said, the experts and politicians have no Plan B to fall back on." Is there any solution to the crisis? "I don't think there is one," Simmons said. "The solution is to pray."

In 1999, before he was elected vice president and was still CEO of Halliburton, one of the world's largest providers of products and services to the oil industry, Dick Cheney slipped a little peak oil theory into his own economic projections at a petroleum conference in London. "By some estimates, there will be an average of 2 percent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead, along with, conservatively, a 3 percent natural decline in production from existing reserves," Cheney said. "That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 million barrels a day."

As Savinar points out, that's six times the amount currently pumped daily by Saudi Arabia, one of the few countries still possessing excess capacity. Where does Cheney think we're going to get the extra oil? Does the Bush administration even have a plan?

They haven't announced it publicly, but with a little creative connecting of the dots, it's not too hard to decipher how the Bush administration plans to deal with the crisis. One of the first things Cheney did after taking office, besides meeting in secret with energy industry leaders, was to make "energy security" a national priority. Even before 9-11, Cheney strongly advocated invading Iraq, ostensibly to rid the world of an evil tyrant, but no doubt with an eye on the Iraqi oil fields, the second largest reserves in the world after Saudi Arabia's. Indeed, detailed maps of the Iraqi oil fields are among the few items that have been publicly released from his secret energy meetings.

After 9-11, it was immediately clear to intelligence officials that Saddam Hussein and Iraq had not played a role in the terrorist attack. Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld pushed for the invasion anyway, and thanks to some trumped-up intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, the administration was able to cajole Congress into approving Bush's "preventive war" doctrine; by March, 2003 the invasion was on. More than a year into the conflict, no WMDs or connections to the 9-11 terrorists have been found; the Iraqis have welcomed their "liberators" with bullets and rocket-propelled grenades instead of open arms; widely disseminated photographs of American prison guards torturing Iraqi detainees have shamed the United States in front of the world; and more than 800 American soldiers have died, not to mention some 10,000 innocent Iraqi civilians.

That doesn't sound like much of a plan, as the Bush administration's detractors have increasingly pointed out. But as Savinar says, oil makes it all make sense. Another dot to connect: Cheney is now being investigated for allegedly participating in secret dealings that granted his former company, Halliburton, the contract to rebuild Iraq's oil industry. Suppose the goal all along was to seize control of Iraq's oil reserves?

"The reason we don't have an exit strategy is that we don't plan to leave," says Savinar. There's an estimated 20- to 30-year supply of oil in Iraq's reserves, and the longer it stays in the ground, the more valuable it becomes. Heinberg is inclined to agree that the United States has no intention of leaving Iraq, pointing to 14 permanent military bases that have been built there since the war started. These bases complete a line of military outposts stretching through Afghanistan, all situated near areas where large reserves of oil are known to exist.

Heinberg says this is the wrong path we have chosen, the path of cutthroat competition that treats blood and oil as commodities to be freely traded, as if neither had its own intrinsic value. As far as Heinberg is concerned, it is the road to ruin for us all.

CLIP - read the whole article at http://www.metroactive.com/papers/sonoma/06.09.04/oil-0424.html

"This fourth and final option begins with the assumption that industrial civilization cannot be salvaged in anything like its present form, and that we are now living through the early stages of disintegration. If this is so, it makes sense for at least some of us to devote our energies toward preserving the most worthwhile cultural achievements of the past few centuries."

He calls that path merely "building lifeboats," and if it creates a sinking feeling in the pits of readers' stomachs, perhaps it's intended. In a world that continues to trade blood for oil, this may be the only avenue of escape left.

---

Richard Heinberg appears in discussion after the documentary, 'The End of Suburbia: Oil Depletion and the Collapse of the American Dream,' on Wednesday, June 16, at 7:30pm. New College of California, 99 Sixth St., Santa Rosa. Free; donations requested. 707.568.3093.

From the June 9-15, 2004 issue of the North Bay Bohemian.




5.

From: http://www.BreakForNews.com/G8-World-Order.htm

Dawn of the G8 New World Order

10th June, 2004

by Fintan Dunne, Editor of http://www.BreakForNews.com/index.htm

In the last few days the totalitarian domination of the developing world has solidified around the annexation of Iraq. And the G8 elite have moved swiftly on to outline the next phase of their New World Order.

First, the U.N. rubber-stamped an Iraqi puppet government --complete with a CIA-sponsored Iraqi president --and a U.S. ambassador with a blind spot about death squads.

Then the ultimate bad-cop USA, and good-cop UN --dropped the facade and carved up Iraq together.

Now the G8 meeting in Georgia has just announced a 50,000 strong global "peacekeeping" force --aimed first at Africa.

And they simultaneously declared a "partnership" with a zone called "Broader Middle East and North Africa."

Centcom, in other words.

You may have heard of the Middle East. Particularly Iraq, Israel and Palestine. Now the Middle East has miraculously enlarged to the ominously named "Broader Middle East and North Africa."

A briefing (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040609-7.html) on the G8 meeting between Bush and Tony Blair sheds light on the now very clear modus operandi of the G8.

Question: I wonder if you saw Afghanistan, in a sense, as a model for what could now happen in Iraq where there's an independent military force still under US command, and then a NATO peacekeeping force, and whether there's any possibility that the European Union could substitute for NATO in that sort of role in Iraq?

SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I don't think anyone has seriously considered the possibility of the ESDP taking over a military role in Iraq. The European Union is going to take over the Bosnia mission, which NATO is going to close out successfully, and that's going to be quite enough, I think, for the ESDP to handle for the moment. So I don't think anybody has contemplated this.

As in the case of Bosnia, now Iraq, the G8 first send in the Americans --whose population is unaware that their armed forces are the expendable storm-troopers of the new world order. The invasion phase.

Depending on the desired economic level of the target country, the civil society structures and physical infrastructure are deliberately degraded to the appropriate level. Mild destruction --as in Serbia-- enables profitable reconstruction.

Severe degradation --as in Iraq-- is unleashed on zones which are rich in natural resources. These zones are to be denied development and merely used for resource plunder.

Then, NATO or UN or Multinational Forces are sent in for the "peacekeeping" phase of permanent colonial occupation.

All the while, the G8 act out fake dramatics on the stage of international public opinion. The US acts the bully. The UN/EU role is to be the good guys. This charade has worked well.

A just-released survey (http://atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FF08Aa03.html) conducted by the international polling firm Globescan, found global public confidence in the United Nations is now at a high of 59%.

That marks a dramatic improvement over the 40% confidence in the U.N. in the Globescan poll of August, 2002.

That's what the posturing by the U.N. was all about. Improving public confidence in the institution --while soaking up the inevitable dissent to the latest G8 imperial venture conquest campaign.

The posturing ended the moment the G8 "set aside their differences" and well and truly nailed Iraq at the U.N. --ending the EU/UN pretence as the conscience of the international community.

For "international community," read instead: "G8 monopoly market capitalism."

But you cannot pretend to be the conscience of G8 capitalism. That's a non sequitor. Capitalism is simply an amoral utilitarian economic system. By definition, it has no conscience.

As events at the UN and the G8 summit have just illustrated.

Next comes the carve up of Africa, and the rest of the Middle East. Next comes the continuation of genocidal policies against the world's poor. Next comes the global corporate order. Resource pillage.

Meanwhile the globalization-induced readjustment of U.S. living standards continues --under the smokescreen of war. As the corporates raid the treasury before finally departing the U.S. for low cost shores.

It's not: "Down with the parasitic fat cats."
And: "You won't get me, I'm part of the Union."

It's more: "Down with Osama the terrorist."
And: "Al-Quaida won't get me, I'm part of Homeland Security."

Wag, Wag, Wag.
The tail wags the dog.
Wag the Dog movie.

It's all been a movie, with players and a script.

Deranged Dictator Bush.
Fickle Foreign Frenchies.

And you --in the middle-- being played like a sucker.

Welcome to the G8 New Word Order.

---

From: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/06/20040609-30.html

Partnership for Progress and a Common Future with the Region of the Broader Middle East and North Africa

WhiteHouse.gov
Sea Island,
Georgia June 9, 2004

1. We the leaders of the G8 are mindful that peace, political, economic and social development, prosperity and stability in the countries of the Broader Middle East and North Africa represent a challenge which concerns us and the international community as a whole. Therefore, we declare our support for democratic, social and economic reform emanating from that region.

2. The peoples of the Broader Middle East and North Africa have a rich tradition and culture of accomplishment in government, trade, science, the arts, and more.... We welcome recent statements on the need for reform from leaders in the region, especially the latest statement issued at the Arab League Summit in Tunis, in which Arab leaders expressed their determination "to firmly establish the basis for democracy."

... As the leaders of the major industrialized democracies in the world, we recognize our special responsibility to support freedom and reform, and pledge our continuing efforts in this great task.

3. Therefore, we commit ourselves today to a Partnership for Progress and a Common Future with the governments and peoples of the Broader Middle East and North Africa.

This partnership will be based on genuine cooperation with the region's governments, as well as business and civil society representatives to strengthen freedom, democracy, and prosperity for all.

5.8. Supporting reform in the region, for the benefit of all its citizens, is a long-term effort, and requires the G-8 and the region to make a generational commitment.

8. The Partnership we launch today builds on years of support for reform efforts in the region through bilateral and multilateral cooperation programs. The Euro-Mediterranean Partnership ("Barcelona Process"), the U.S. Middle East Partnership Initiative, and the Japan-Arab Dialogue Initiative are examples of our strong commitment to supporting democratic and economic development.

---

From: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1128040.htm

G8 seeks to help create
world peacekeeping force

The Group of Eight (G8) industrial nations intends to help create a global peacekeeping force of more than 50,000 people over the next five to six years, senior US officials have said.

The two officials, briefing reporters at the G8 summit, said the initiative grew out of African requests for assistance in ending the wars that plague the continent.

"The centerpiece of this initiative will be a pledge by the G8 countries to train a certain number, we hope well in excess of 50,000 peacekeepers around the world, but beginning in Africa, over the next five or six years," said one of the officials, who spoke on condition that they not be identified.

"And it really is sort of unique — it's the first time the G8 has taken on a specific —a pledge like this, and has said we are going to train this number of peacekeepers over this time frame, and we're going to seek to equip them, and we're going to seek to help them get to where they want to be."

"Security is a necessary condition for all the reforms and progress that we hope to promote around the world ... It's not for a lack of willingness that African nations and other nations are unable to sometimes deal with the peace support operations that they find themselves charged with."

They said that although the initiative would be launched in Africa, where the need was greatest, its scope was global. "The idea is to train peacekeepers and equip them and enable them to get to where they're needed all over the world," one official said.

One of the officials said Italy was offering the use of a training center.

The Bush administration would seek $US660 million from Congress to spend over the next five years for training and equipment, the US officials said.

---

From: http://www.financialexpress-bd.com/index3.asp?cnd=6/10/2004§ion_id=2&newsid=12460&spcl=no

Industrialised nations intend to create
global peacekeeping force
G8 summit marks a new step in 
trans-Atlantic rapprochement

SAVANNAH, Georgia, June 9 (AFP):

If the Group of Eight summit is aimed at restoring harmony among the world's powers after the turmoil of Iraq, it has also spotlighted lingering tensions over a range of issues.

The unanimous UN Security Council vote Tuesday endorsing plans for the restoration of Iraqi self-rule has given the gathering here a promising start, unlike the prickliness that marked last year's talks in France.

After last week's D-Day commemorations in France, and ahead of the US-European summit in Ireland and NATO summit in Turkey, this year's G8 gathering on Sea Island marks a new step in trans-Atlantic rapprochement.

The chorus of diplomatic satisfaction sounding from the posh resort island was welcome music to US President George W Bush who was hoping to refurbish his statesman credentials ahead of his re-election bid in November.

"The international community showed that it stands side by side with the Iraqi people," Bush exulted for reporters.

Even opponents of last year's US-led invasion of Iraq were more or less upbeat. Russian President Vladmir Putin called the resolution a "major step forward" and France expressed satisfaction at the unanimous vote.

The tone contrasted markedly with the diplomatic venom that flowed before and just after the March 2003 invasion when many analysts said US-European relations had hit their lowest point since World War II.

But despite the cheery pronouncements of a squad of US officials stalking summit journalists to predict a series of breakthroughs on all sorts of subjects, the talks here are still full of potential pitfalls.

For all the words of support for Iraqi reconstruction, neither France, nor Russia, nor Germany, nor Canada show any sign of easing in their refusal to send soldiers to Iraq to give the Americans a hand.

Even if all the G8 partners support a prosperous Iraq, US plans for forgiving the "vast majority" of Iraqi debts have run up against deep reservations from Paris and Moscow, reluctant to go so far for a country drenched in potential oil riches.

US ambitions to spur democracy in the Middle East, once suposed to be the highlight of the summit, have also been scaled back by the United States in the face of fierce resistance from key Arab states and a tepid welcome in Europe.

Europeans, keen to preseve their own dialogue with the Arab world, seem unwilling to go much further than an expression of support for the general principle of the battered US scheme.

European Commission president Romano Prodi said US policy in the Middle East, particularly over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, was far from commanding unanimous support.
A Russian official here said the summiteers had yet to reach agreement on at least two other major issues.

Meanwhile, Bush, fresh from gaining passage of a critical UN resolution on Iraq, introduces the new president of Iraq to fellow leaders at the Group of Eight summit today.

At the same time, G8 negotiators were working to complete the details of an initiative urging Arab and Muslim leaders in the Middle East and North Africa to adopt democratic reforms.

Iraq's new president, Ghazi al-Yawar, will make his first entrance on the world stage when he has lunch with Bush and leaders from Afghanistan, Bahrain, Jordan, Tunisia, Turkey and Yemen. He will then be introduced to the other G8 leaders.

---

See also:

Security is G8's prime focus (June 9)
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/728908.cms

Rebuffed by Allies: No Hope for NATO Troops in Iraq
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/061204K.shtml




SUBSCRIPTION TO THE EARTH RAINBOW NETWORK E-LIST

If you would like to subscribe to the Earth Rainbow Network automated listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, including each new Meditation Focus issued every two week, simply send a blank email at earthrainbownetwork-subscribe@lists.riseup.net from the email account to which you want to receive the material compiled and networked by the Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator. Subscription is FREE!





BACK TO THE FIRST HOME PAGE OF THIS SITE