The Perfect Storm - Part 2
By Michael C. Ruppert
3-26-3
© Copyright 2003, From The Wilderness Publications, www.copvcia.com. All
Rights Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web
site for non-profit purposes only.
(FTW) - Atlanta, Military, economic, oil, and political storms continue to
gather and converge in what may become a Perfect Storm for the Bush
Administration and the United States economy.
On the fifth day of a U.S. military campaign rejected by the U.N. Security
Council, at least 12 U.S. soldiers have been captured by Iraqi forces near
al Nasiriyah even as various foreign news sources are reporting that as many
as four to ten of the vaunted M1A1 Abrams main battle tanks have been
destroyed in combat. A helicopter aircrew has been captured further north.
ABC has reported that coalition casualties are approaching 200. Promises
that Iraqi civilians expecting liberation would greet coalition troops with
open arms have been unfulfilled as Iraqi resistance stiffens on a daily basis.
In a tragic event, an African-American Sergeant of the 101st Air Assault
Division staged a grenade attack on tents occupied by his comrades-in-arms,
killing one and wounding fourteen. The fallout from this tragedy will have
lasting repercussions on the psyches of both U.S. military and civilian
populations. Images of an American Black man face down and handcuffed - no
matter how serious the offense - will not fade quickly and will further
erode an extremely fragile and increasingly volatile domestic landscape. The
suspect is Muslim.
Saddam Hussein and his forces are now gaining strength, political cachet,
and popular support with each new engagement while coalition forces lose it
with every casualty and delay. One of the first questions asked at a somber,
live press conference at Central Command headquarters in Qatar on Sunday
was, "Has America gotten itself into another Vietnam?" This question came
after only three days of ground combat. Around the Arab and Muslim world,
Saddam Hussein,s picture is becoming an icon of anti-colonial resistance.
Over a thousand years of European and American history, the Arab world has
never given in easily to occupying forces; they always prefer one of their
own no matter how distasteful to an outsider. The Crusades were the earliest
lesson for Europe and the Suez crisis of 1956 the most recent.
Consistent with predictions made in FTW, the Turkish government, poised to
send several brigades into northern Iraq, is threatening to turn Northern
Iraq into absolute chaos. The Kurds who live in the region ethnically blur
the borders of Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran and their support is critical to
U.S. military plans. Having sought an independent homeland for decades, they
have been consistently used by the U.S. and western powers for covert
operations and destabilization programs and they have always been betrayed
later. At the moment FTW gives a 50-50 likelihood that the U.S. will
ultimately and after much protestation for effect allow the Turkish incursion.
That will instantly create a highly unstable and balkanized region. The U.S.
has historically both created and preferred "balkanization" to secure
commercial control of natural resources and civilian populations with
devastating results for anyone living in the region. This could ultimately
if the U.S. invasion is successful - result in Iraq being divided into three
or more separately governed regions.
The instability created by such a development would likely spread throughout
the Middle East quickly. None of the region,s borders has existed for more
than eighty years and all of them were drawn by departing colonial powers.
Perceptions in Saudi Arabia of this kind of trend might automatically
require U.S. forces to engage in a two-front war if the already unstable
Saudi regime begins to fracture and weaken.
To date, this writer has seen no reportage of how the Saudi populace is
reacting to a war plan that is stumbling. For approximately six months, FTW
has been reporting that Saudi Arabia would likely become unstable with the
invasion and that American war planners might be planning for a nearly
simultaneous operation to control Saudi oil fields, which contain 25% of all
the oil on the planet. But as the efficacy of U.S. military might comes into
question, the brass ring of oil becomes ever more elusive and a Saudi
occupation becomes a military goal out of reach.
In the meantime, there are increasing signs that the U.S. political and
economic elites are laying the groundwork to make the Bush administration,
specifically Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Perle and Wolfowitz,
sacrificial scapegoats for a failed policy in time to consolidate post 9-11
gains, regroup and move forward.
These indications include written press attacks on the Bush administration
by select journalists long known for their loyalty and obedience to
financial interests and the CIA; a growing revolt from within the
intelligence communities of the U.S. and the U.K. including damaging leaks
undermining the credibility of the administration; serious economic
consequences closing in on the financial markets; growing signs of pending
oil shortages; and indications that the use of forged documents by the Bush
and Blair regimes may become the Watergate burglary of the 21st century.
THE WRITTEN PRESS TURN ON BUSH, BIG TIME
While most of the American people rely on television coverage for their
worldview, those within the government, politics and the financial markets
look to a select group of entrenched print journalists to sniff the winds of
political change. Those winds started blowing against George W. Bush and his
administration before the war began. In what appears to be intensifying
anti-Bush rhetoric, an unprecedented media effort is beginning to cut the
legs from under the administration even as it gambles everything on an
increasingly elusive military victory.
March 12 Beginning with a relatively unknown press organization, it was
reported at www.informationtimes.com that 35 members of the U.S. Congress,
overwhelmingly Democrat, had flatly rejected the U.S. war effort and were
calling for a repeal of the February resolution authorizing the president to
use force against Iraq.
March 12 On the same day, journalistic heavyweight Howard Fineman of
NEWSWEEK reported that the "blame game" had already begun for a war that had
not. He wrote "But few think it,s going to be easy. And my guess is that
team discipline inside the Bush administration is about to be fractured by
the collateral damage that already is being caused by a war we have yet to
fight. We are embarrassingly alone diplomatically, and State Department
underlings (privately) blame Rumsfeld & Co. Inside the Pentagon - but
outside of Rumsfeld,s office I,m told that E-Ring brass have adopted what
one source calls a Vietnam mentality,, a sense of resignation about a
policy...they seriously doubt will work...
"This time around is a different story. The closer we get to the event, the
less Bush is in control of events..."
March 14 The Los Angeles Times, Greg Miller reported that a State Department
document was contradicting the Bush administration,s claim that the Iraqi
invasion would encourage the spread of democracy.
"A classified State Department report expresses doubt that installing a new
regime in Iraq will foster the spread of democracy in the Middle East, a
claim President Bush has made in trying to build support for a war,
according to intelligence officials familiar with the document.
"The report exposes significant divisions within the Bush administration
over the so-called domino theory, one of the arguments that underpins the
case for invading Iraq."
The story specifically singled out Pentagon hawks Richard Perle and Paul
Wolfowitz as objects of criticism by the U.S. intelligence community.
March 15 The International Herald Tribune reported that top officials of the
World Trade Organization had also started turning on Bush by reporting,
"...officials said they feared that American moves within the organization
and toward a war in Iraq would weaken respect for international rules and
lead to serious practical consequences for the world economy and business.
"In the past months the United States has compiled one of the worst records
for violating trade rules...
"They said they were worried that all international institutions would
suffer a loss of credibility if the one superpower appeared to be choosing
which rules to obey and which rules to ignore."
The WTO, globalization, is the heart of the economic power bloc that brought
Bush into power.
March 16 The big guns at The Washington Post begin to open fire. In a
lengthy story on the controversial Carlyle Group, a major private investment
bank with which both the President and his father have deep financial
connections, Greg Schneider made some absolutely stunning statements
"David M. Rubenstein is exasperated, and he blurts something that a quick
look around the room proves is outrageous "We,re not," he nearly shouts,
"that well connected!
"Behind him is a picture of Rubenstein on a plane with then-Gov. George W.
Bush. Across the room, a photo of Rubenstein with the President,s father and
mother. Next to that, Rubenstein and Mikhail Gorbachev. Elsewhere
Rubenstein and Jimmy Carter. On a bookshelf Rubenstein and the pope...
"Rubenstein, after all, is founder of the Carlyle Group...
"But the connections have cost Carlyle, in ways that are hard to measure. It
has developed a reputation as the CIA of the business world omnipresent,
powerful, a little sinister...
"Last year then-congresswoman Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.) even suggested that
Carlyle,s and Bush,s ties to the Middle East made them somehow complicitous
in the Sept. 11 terror attacks. While her comments were widely dismissed as
irresponsible, the publicity highlighted Carlyle,s increasingly notorious
reputation. Internet sites with headlines such as "The Axis of Corporate
Evil" purport to link Carlyle to everything from Enron to Al Qaeda.
",We,ve actually replaced the Trilateral Commission, as the darling of
conspiracy theorists, says Rubenstein who, truth be told, happens to be a
member of the Trilateral Commission.
"It didn,t help that as the World trade Center burned on Sept. 11, 2001, the
news interrupted a Carlyle business conference at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel
here attended by a brother of Osama bin Laden. Former President Bush, a
fellow investor, had been with him at the conference the previous day...
"The company has rewarded its faithful with a 36 percent average annual rate
of return...
"Times are changing, though. It,s no longer valid to assume that Carlyle,s
golden roll of all-stars automatically opens doors in certain parts of the
world, says Youssef M. Ibrahim of the Council on Foreign Relations in New
York. George Bush junior is kind of screwing his father up, slowly but
surely, in terms of securing relationships in the region,, Ibrahim says of
the Mideast. The current administration,s support for Israel, its hostility
toward Iraq and its rocky dealings with the Saudi royal family have soured
business and political relationships alike, he says."
[To view previous FTW stories on the Carlyle group please visit
http//www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/index.html#bush.]
March 16 On the same day as the Carlyle story, one of The Washington Post,s
biggest pundits for several decades, Walter Pincus, fired a serious shot
into the administration,s belly. To veterans of the 1996-98 popular
nationwide campaign to expose CIA connections to cocaine trafficking,
Pincus, name will be remembered as one of the chief defenders of the CIA. In
fact, Pincus has been one of the Post,s primary CIA conduits for more than
thirty years. In 1967, he wrote a short feature for the Post titled, "How I
Traveled the World on a CIA Stipend."
In a story titled "U.S. Lacks Specifics on Banned Arms", Pincus described
how U.S. "Senior intelligence analysts say they feel caught between the
demands from the White House, Pentagon and other government policymakers for
intelligence that would make the administration,s case and what they say is
a lack of hard facts,, one official said.
"The assertions, coming on the eve of a possible decision by President Bush
to go to war against Iraq, have raised concerns among some members of the
intelligence community about whether administration officials have
exaggerated intelligence in a desire to convince the American public..."
Pincus went on to detail how key U.S. Senators like Carl Levin and John
Warner were questioning data that had apparently been misrepresented and/or
hidden from the U.N.
An ominous note at the end of the story, reminding anyone who read it of
Watergate and the demise of the Nixon presidency, added "Staff Writer Bob
Woodward contributed to this report."
March 18 Pincus returned again, in the company of Post Staff Writer Dana
Milbank, to place more bricks in the wall that might seal the
administration,s fate. The story titled, "Bush Clings to Dubious Allegations
About Iraq" opened with the lead, "As the Bush administration prepares to
attack Iraq this week, it is doing so on the basis of a number of
allegations against Iraqi president Saddam Hussein that have been challenged
and in some cases disproved by the United Nations, European governments and
even U.S. intelligence reports."
The story went on to document misrepresentations by George Bush, Dick Cheney
and Colin Powell that made it clear that if George W. Bush was going down
his whole administration was going with him. It was now a part of the
official Washington record that all three had been guilty of
misrepresentations to the press and the American people.
March 20 Columnist Craig Roberts, writing in the traditionally
pro-Republican, conservative Washington Times delivered perhaps the most
shocking signal that the power establishment, which should have stopped the
war before it started, was moving to set the administration up for a fall.
In a column titled "A Reckless Path", Roberts, lead paragraph read
"Will Bush be impeached? Will he be called a war criminal? These are not
hyperbolic questions. Mr. Bush has permitted a small cadre of
neoconservatives to isolate him from world opinion, putting him at odds with
the United Nations and America,s allies."
It got worse from there.
"...On the eve of Mr. Bush,s ultimatum, it came to light that a key piece of
evidence used by the Bush administration to link Iraq to a nuclear weapons
program is a forgery. Sen. Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, the ranking
Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, has asked the FBI to
investigate the forged documents that the Bush administration has used to
make its case that Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction."
Amazingly, Roberts then went on to make a comparison with Adolf Hitler,s
faked attacks by SS soldiers dressed as Polish troops in 1939 to justify the
invasion of Poland, which started the Second World War.
Roberts closed his column with a dire warning. "Mr. Bush and his advisers
have forgotten that the power of an American president is temporary and
relative."
March 22 One of The New York Times, chief experts on intelligence, with
close contacts at the CIA, is James Risen. Whenever reading a Risen story
it,s a safe bet to assume that it was fed to him directly by CIA
headquarters. In a story headlined, "CIA Aides Feel Pressure in Preparing
Iraqi Reports" Risen wrote
"The recent disclosure that reports claiming Iraq tried to buy uranium from
Niger were based partly on forged documents has renewed complaints among
analysts at the C.I.A. about the way intelligence related to Iraq has been
handled, several intelligence officials said.
"Analysts at the agency said they had felt pressured to make their
intelligence reports on Iraq conform to Bush administration policies.
"For months, a few C.I.A. analysts have privately expressed concerns to
colleagues and Congressional officials that they have faced pressure in
writing intelligence reports to emphasize links between Saddam Hussein's
government and Al Qaeda.
"As the White House contended that links between Mr. Hussein and Al Qaeda
justified military action against Iraq, these analysts complained that
reports on Iraq have attracted unusually intense scrutiny from senior policy
makers within the Bush administration.
",A lot of analysts have been upset about the way the Iraq-Al Qaeda case has
been handled,, said one intelligence official familiar with the debate."
INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES TURN ON BUSH/BLAIR
It has been happening for two months now. Leaks, protests, even overt
criticisms from those like former senior CIA analyst Stephen Pelletier, who
has revealed that it was Iran rather than Iraq which had killed thousands of
Kurds in massive poison gas attacks in the 1980s. More recently we have seen
British intelligence personnel leak information to the press showing that
Britain,s infamous intelligence dossier on Iraq,s weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) had been plagiarized from outdated information in graduate
student papers and that the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) has engaged
in illegal wiretapping of U.N. officials in attempts to secure enough votes
for a resolution in support of the invasion.
One or perhaps two of these events could be explained as the actions of
individuals. But the frequency and number of these attacks is suggesting
that the intelligence services, which view themselves as permanent and
enduring institutions as compared to passing administrations, are slowly
pulling structural supports from underneath the Bush and Blair
administrations, platform.
On February 8, Counterpunch published a statement by a group calling itself
Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) which gave Secretary of
State Colin Powell a C- grade for providing "context and perspective" on
Iraqi weapons and intent. The statement specifically and correctly chided
the Bush administration for making the violation of a U.N. resolution a
pretext for war pointing out that Israel,s refusal to comply from a U.N.
resolution calling for its withdrawal from territories occupied in 1967 has
never been addressed.
[NOTE Israel is currently in violation of 64 U.N. resolutions as opposed to
Iraq,s 17]
The VIPS statement also vigorously disputed any notion that Iraq posed any
immediate threat to the U.S. and quoted CIA reports supporting that
position. It also disputed Bush/Powell contentions that Iraq had any
previous involvement with terrorist activities. Revealing what may actually
be an intention of the Bush administration, VIPS stated, "Indeed, it is our
view that an invasion of Iraq would ensure overflowing recruitment centers
for terrorists into the indefinite future."
And, striking a chord that is sure to resonate in millions of U.S. military
veterans, VIPS observed, "Reminder The last time we sent troops to the
Gulf, over 600,000 of them, one out of three came back ill many with
unexplained disorders of the nervous system. Your Secretary of Veteran,s
Affairs recently closed the VA healthcare system to nearly 200,000 eligible
veterans by administrative fiat."
Stories from early March in Britain,s The Observer actually produced a copy
of a Top Secret NSA memorandum calling on allied intelligence agencies to
increase their wiretapping and monitoring of U.N. diplomats who might swing
a Security Council vote in favor of the U.S. While reportage on this major
breach of international trust and protocol has gone away, the rage felt by
many diplomats has not. It was later disclosed that an employee of British
intelligence who was outraged by its contents had leaked the memo. However,
reading between the lines, this writer suspects that the leak took place
with a wink and a nod from higher ups.
By March 14, the activities of VIPS were getting favorable coverage by the
Associated Press, a sign that powers controlling both the media and the
intelligence services were pushing the agenda. Although varying editions of
the story appeared in print, on the AP web site and in different parts of
the country, the basic story retained a key lead sentence. "A small group
comprised mostly of retired CIA officers is appealing to colleagues still
inside to go public with any evidence the Bush administration is slanting
intelligence to support its case for war with Iraq."
Such a statement from intelligence veterans has serious repercussions in a
discipline that is noted for never leaking information. That is, unless
there is an agenda that intelligence agencies themselves are pursuing. In
those cases the CIA plays the media, as one CIA executive once described,
"like a Mighty Wurlitzer."
As resignations of outraged civil servants are stacking up on both sides of
the Atlantic like freshly cut firewood, the Bush administration was also
seriously hurt by the resignation of the top Bush National Security Council
official in charge of terrorism, Rand Beers. A March 19 UPI story, while
repeating the Bush administration position that Beers, resignation was not
because of administration deceit and vanishing credibility, left no doubt
that Beers, widely respected in Washington, was just plain fed up and
possibly sensing a sinking ship.
OIL'S NOT WELL
The utterly ridiculous and unjustified drop in oil prices and upsurge in the
Dow last week is belied by real data on oil supplies as the Iraqi invasion
stumbles. As the war intensifies some real garbage and some occasional gems
of truth are coming from the major media.
First, it is a given that while the war is in progress, Iraqi oil exports
are virtually non-existent. The port region around Basra which accounts for
well more than half of Iraqi exports -- is virtually shut down. One pipeline
running from northern Iraq to the Turkish port of Ceyhan is reported to be
intact but there are no reports as to whether oil is actually flowing. It,s
not likely. What this means is that it is a safe bet that two million plus
barrels per day (Mbpd) have been taken out of world supplies.
In the face of this, BusinessWeek, in the February 24 issue, has engaged in
the outrageously dishonest reporting that the Caspian basin may hold 200
billion barrels (Gb) of reserves and that there are some three trillion
barrels of proven conventional oil remaining on the planet. Extensive
research conducted by FTW has shown that Caspian reserves have been verified
by drilling results over the last three years to be only around 40 Gb and
are a major disappointment. FTW data was derived through extensive research
in oil and gas journals, official government reports and by direct
interviews with oil executives who have been in the region.
Planetary reserves of conventional oil are only about one trillion barrels
or enough to keep the world supplied for approximately 30 years in an ever
tightening and ever more expensive marketplace that threatens economies all
over the globe. Motives for the BusinessWeek deception would include
providing propaganda cover for the fact that the invasion of Iraq is totally
about oil and also give false confidence to investors as financial and
equity markets teeter on the brink of collapse.
The Wall Street Journal, however, on March 18, recently engaged in some
serious truth telling. In a page-one story titled "Why the U.S. IS Still
Hooked On Oil Imports", the Journal reported
"President Bush says hydrogen power will lead to energy independence... Mr.
Bush is almost certain to be proved wrong, at least in the next couple of
decades."
After acknowledging that oil price spikes have always led to recessions, the
Journal relied on an extensive body of research of the statements of OPEC
founder, Saudi Sheikh Zaki Yamani to hit at one of the core motivators for
the Iraqi invasion oil production costs. Not every country or region spends
the same amount of money to produce a barrel of oil. And nowhere is oil
cheaper to produce than in the Persian Gulf. The Journal quoted Yamani as
stating at a 1980s OPEC meeting, "Let,s see how the North Sea can produce
oil when prices are at $5 a barrel."
The Journal continued "At low prices, the Persian Gulf countries have an
unbeatable edge. In the mid 1980s it cost them a couple of dollars a barrel
to produce oil. It cost about $15 a barrel off the coast of Britain and
Norway or in the U.S." That was in the 1980s. Credible estimates of North
Sea production costs in dying fields now place the cost per barrel at over $20.
Russia has current estimated production costs of between $19 and $27 a
barrel which reveal the key to everything that,s going on now. The world is
running out of oil. In order to save a teetering U.S. economy the Bush
administration is betting on the rapidly diminishing hope that it can get
Iraqi oil back on the markets and available to the U.S. at a price of
between $15 and $20 per barrel. If the prices drop to the levels Bush needs,
OPEC loses its profits and Russian oil becomes uncompetitive in the market
place.
Bush is not going to get his way.
In a major development, it was reported on Saturday that growing unrest in
Nigeria, an OPEC member and the world,s sixth largest exporter, had shut
down the Chevron Texaco pumping facilities. A story in today,s Economist
confirmed earlier reports that both Chevron and French giant TotalFinaElf
had not only shut down production but ordered evacuations of all their
personnel.
These moves take an immediate 330,000 barrels a day out of world supplies
and they also hearken back to recent lessons learned in Venezuela after a
massive strike shut down Venezuelan production. Refineries and wells don,t
operate at the flip of a switch. They require a constant flow of chemicals
and products to keep their systems primed. When recovering from a shut down,
it often takes a considerable period to reach previous production levels.
While OPEC has announced that it will increase production to offset
shortages, its ability to do so is limited to perhaps a 3-5 Mbpd increase.
That,s a drop in the bucket in current tight markets and in a world that
consumes a billion barrels every twelve days. Iraqi oil fields will require
billions of dollars of investment and years to increase Iraqi production to
five or eight Mbpd. And that clock will only start ticking once the country
is secure and safe, an outcome that is not at all guaranteed at the moment.
In the meantime, according to The Financial Times today, the Mexican
government has announced its intent to start selling U.S. dollars on world
currency markets. This move could further weaken an already shaky U.S.
dollar, especially if other nations, angered at the U.S. invasion of Iraq,
follow suit. Since oil is currently purchased in dollars, inevitable future
oil price spikes could become doubly painful for the U.S. economy as the
dollar loses value.
BUSH'S WATGERATE BURGLARY
"At the Security Council, some are questioning the veracity of any U.S.
claim regarding Iraq." The Boston Globe, March 16, 2003
The first official report that documents prepared on stationery of the
governments of Niger and Iraq detailing a planned sale of uranium to Iraq
were forged came on March 7. Mohamed ElBaradei, the chief nuclear inspector
for the International Atomic Energy Agency told the U.N. Security Council
that the documents, "were not authentic." The first paper to break the news
was London,s Financial Times. The documents, not very clever or convincing,
failed to convince the U.N. but were, however, included in British Prime
Minister Tony Blair,s now legendary flawed intelligence dossier, which had
been presented to Parliament on Sept. 24, 2002.
The Washington Post picked up on the story on March 8 where it reported
that, "The forgers had made relatively crude errors that eventually gave
them away including names and titles that did not match up with the
individuals who held office at the time the letters were purportedly
written, the officials said."
The Post reported administration officials as giving the somewhat lame
excuse, "We fell for it." No one even tried to suggest a motive for someone
other than the Bush or Blair regimes to commit the crime.
Not everyone fell for it. As reported in what are now at least a half dozen
stories, the CIA was suspicious of the documents and purposely left them out
of their own report on Iraqi weapons. That did not, however, prevent George
W. Bush, Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld or Dick Cheney from touting them as
authentic. The State Department even authoritatively referred to the
documents in a December 19, 2002 Fact Sheet titled "Illustrative Examples of
Omissions From the Iraqi Declaration to the United Nations Security Council".
By March 13, The Post was back with a story indicating that the FBI was
looking into the source of the documents and "the possibility that a foreign
government is using a deception campaign to foster support for military
action against Iraq."
Huh? Is there some country out there we haven,t heard of that really hates
Iraq other than the U.S., Britain or Israel?
The Post story closed by saying, "The CIA, which also had obtained the
documents, had questions about whether they were accurate,, said one
intelligence official, and it decided not to include them in its file on
Iraq,s program to procure weapons of mass destruction."
This begs the question as to whether CIA Director George Tenet told Bush or
Cheney or Powell that the documents were forged. That,s his job above all
else to give the President reliable and trustworthy intelligence.
On March 14, Ken Guggenheim of The Associated Press reported that Senator
Jay Rockefeller (D-WVa.), ranking member of the Senate Intelligence
Committee had called the FBI and asked for an investigation of the
documents. Rockefeller,s full name is John D. Rockefeller, IV and he is a
direct descendant of the same family that essentially brought the Bush
family into power. What is amazing here is not only that someone has
requested an investigation of just one of the hundreds of Bush
administration inconsistencies and proven lies since 9-11, but that it was a
Rockefeller who requested it. That reality has thundered throughout
Washington,s power corridors like an earthquake.
FTW placed calls to both FBI headquarters and Rockefeller,s Washington
offices asking for comment or further information. An FBI spokesperson told
FTW that the Bureau had nothing to say. After hearing what the topic was, a
Rockefeller spokesperson promised to call back but did not.
Colin Powell immediately started denying that the State Department had
anything to do with creating the forgeries. No one had accused him! And the
story picked up "legs" in print media around the world.
By the 15th, CNN had picked up the story on its web site and had added
damning observations about the childish, crude and "obvious" nature of the
forgeries that "should never have gotten past the CIA." But the CIA had
already established a record saying that it never trusted the documents.
Asked about the documents on Meet the Press the previous Sunday, Powell
simply stated, "It was the information that we had. We provided it. If that
information is inaccurate, fine."
Not so fine.
Where did the documents come from? Already inconsistent finger pointing,
eerily reminiscent of the loose threads pulled on by Woodward and Bernstein
in 1972 and 1973 are starting to surface. Powell says he doesn,t know where
the documents came from. Britain is remaining silent and the government of
Niger has issued a blunt statement indicating that the documents were forged
in London and Washington.
My guess is that they were forged inside the National Security Council
rather than at the CIA. The CIA would have done a better job. Can you say,
"Iran-Contra"?
The most scathing blow to date and there are sure to be more came from
Congressman Henry Waxman (D, Ca.) who, in a six-page March 17 letter to
George Bush, created a locked-down record of Bush,s, Cheney,s, Rumsfeld,s
and Powell,s use of the documents, even pointing out that the President had
made reference to the documents in his State-of-the-Union address in January
by saying, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently
sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Waxman noted next
that, "a day later, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told reporters at a
news briefing that Iraq "recently was discovered seeking significant
quantities of uranium from Africa."
Waxman closed his letter with three chilling questions that may now distance
George Tenet from George W. Bush and his cabinet, who will all go down
together if it becomes necessary. Waxman asked the President to directly
address
1 -Whether CIA officials communicated their doubts about the credibility of
the forged evidence to other Administration officials, including officials
at the Department of State, the Department of Defense, the National Security
Council, and the White House;
2- Whether the CIA had any input into the "Fact Sheet" distributed by the
State Department on December 19, 2002; and
3- Whether the CIA reviewed your statement in the State of the Union address
regarding Iraq,s attempts to obtain uranium from Africa and, if so, what the
CIA said about the statement.
I can hear the distant echoes of Senator Howard Baker in the Senate
Watergate hearings asking, "What did the President know and when did he know
it?"
THE PERFECT STORM
It,s all coming together on the radar screen and the chances are that these
storms are going to merge. In this all out economic war of survival, as Peak
Oil forces its way into the public consciousness, Russia will likely
continue to provide Saddam with arms and technical assistance. France may
well share intelligence. China, with the slightest nod, can contribute
tactical advice and many mines for the Mediterranean. All of them can
indirectly, and through plausibly deniable methods, foster and supply
revolts in oil producing regions around the globe. And they can all laugh
and deny as the U.S. tries to point a finger at them. This has all been done
before.
In the meantime Vladimir Putin can cushion his allies with cheap oil as the
U.S. starts to die of thirst.
Before Americans become outraged that such a scenario might be unfolding, I
would remind them that every one of these tactics has been employed by the
United States in spades against each of these countries for more than fifty
years. It was the U.S. that chose this course to begin with. The tragedy, of
course, is that the American people will suffer greatly as the storms
converge. The truth is that the American people have never been any more of
a concern to the powers that be than the people in the rest of the world
have, except that giving them a higher standard of living made them
compliant and dumb. It appears as if even that is no longer necessary. The
destruction of American credibility and the transfer of its wealth are
necessary steps in the creation of the New World Order.
Everything might just come crashing down all at once and if that happens the
powers that rule will sacrifice their little Caesar and cut a deal with the
other nations quickly. Just as in Shakespeare's play, there will be many
wounds in Caesar's body, inflicted by many different people. But most
certainly one of the daggers will be found in the hand of George Tenet and
the CIA. He knows where the real power resides.
|