3 March 2017 — Media Lens
The title of the editorial said it all:
‘The Guardian view on George W Bush: a welcome return’
In a tongue-in-cheek, almost jovial, piece the Guardian unsubtly rehabilitated a man responsible for crimes that are among the most egregious in all history.
15 November 2013 — RT
15 November 2013 — The Independent
Washington is playing the lead role in delaying the publication of the long-awaited report into how Britain went to war with Iraq, The Independent has learnt.
1 July 2013 — Venezuela Analysis
The DataGate? It began in Rome when the National Security Agency (NSA) spied on the visit of Hugo Chávez. In May 2006, U.S. secret services organized a massive espionage operation against the Venezuelan president. The Italian capital was intercepted for a week.
30 May 2013 — Global Research – WHDT World News Program
Former U.S. President George W. Bush recently dedicated his Presidential Library in Dallas. The ceremony included speeches by President Obama, ex-President Bush, and every other living ex-president. But none of the speeches so much as mentioned to Iraq war — the undertaking that dominated George W. Bush’s presidency, and will define his historic legacy.
11 January, 2013 — The Real News Network
Michael Ratner: From Guantanamo to Brennan at CIA, Obama carries on the policies of George Bush Continue reading
25 May 2011 — Black Agenda Report
Unable to defend the indefensible, Black Obama supporters have been ‘rendered all but mute on issues of policy.’ They got their chance to reenter the political conversation when Princeton professor and media celebrity Cornel West, a former Obama supporter who is now a harsh critic, speculated on the racial workings of the president’s brain. That was a mistake. ‘There is no need to inject racial psychoanalysis into the (public) conversation when straightforward political analysis is more than sufficient to the task.’
15 November, 2010 — Daily Telegraph
[I didn’t make this up. WB]
“George W. Bush can’t fight for freedom and authorise torture” – Boris Johnson
If the West’s aim is to spread the rule of law, it cannot be achieved by vile means, argues Boris Johnson.
You can’t fight for freedom and authorise torture, Mr Bush; George Bush has defended waterboarding as an George Bush has defended waterboarding as an ‘enhanced interrogation technique’ Photo: AP
It is not yet clear whether George W Bush is planning to cross the Atlantic to flog us his memoirs, but if I were his PR people I would urge caution. As book tours go, this one would be an absolute corker. It is not just that every European capital would be brought to a standstill, as book-signings turned into anti-war riots. The real trouble — from the Bush point of view — is that he might never see Texas again.
One moment he might be holding forth to a great perspiring tent at Hay-on-Wye. The next moment, click, some embarrassed member of the Welsh constabulary could walk on stage, place some handcuffs on the former leader of the Free World, and take him away to be charged. Of course, we are told this scenario is unlikely. Dubya is the former leader of a friendly power, with whom this country is determined to have good relations. But that is what torture-authorising Augusto Pinochet thought. And unlike Pinochet, Mr Bush is making no bones about what he has done.
Unless the 43rd president of the United States has been grievously misrepresented, he has admitted to authorising and sponsoring the use of torture. Asked whether he approved of ‘waterboarding’ in three specific cases, he told his interviewer that ‘damn right’ he did, and that this practice had saved lives in America and Britain. It is hard to overstate the enormity of this admission.
4 October, 2010 — NSA
U.S. and British Documents Show Transatlantic Propaganda Cooperation
Joint Drafting & Editing of White Papers “Fixed the Facts”
Edited by John Prados and Christopher Ames
For more information contact:
John Prados – 202/994-7000
Washington, DC, October 4, 2010 – For nearly a year before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the British government of Prime Minister Tony Blair collaborated closely with the George W. Bush administration to produce a far starker picture of the threat from Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) than was justified by intelligence at the time, according to British and American government documents posted today by the National Security Archive.
1 October, 2010 — NSA
U.S. and British Documents Give No Indication Alternatives Were Seriously Considered
For more information contact:
John Prados – (202) 994-7000
Washington, DC, October 1, 2010 – Contrary to statements by President George W. Bush or Prime Minister Tony Blair, declassified records from both governments posted on the Web today reflect an early and focused push to prepare war plans and enlist allies regardless of conflicting intelligence about Iraq’s threat and the evident difficulties in garnering global support.
22 September, 2010 — NSA
U.S. Sets “Decapitation of Government” As Early Goal of Combat
Talking Points for Rumsfeld-Franks Meeting in November 2001 Outline Policy Makers’ Aims for the Conflict and Postwar Rule of Iraq
Declassified Documents Show Bush Administration Diverting Attention and Resources to Iraq Less than Two Months after Launch of Afghanistan War
For more information contact:
Joyce Battle – 202/994-7000
4 October, 2010 — NSA
THE IRAQ WAR — PART III: Shaping the Debate
U.S. and British Documents Show Transatlantic Propaganda Cooperation
Joint Drafting & Editing of White Papers “Fixed the Facts”
Edited by John Prados and Christopher Ames
For more information contact:
John Prados – 202/994-7000
Washington, DC, October 4, 2010 – For nearly a year before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the British government of Prime Minister Tony Blair collaborated closely with the George W. Bush administration to produce a far starker picture of the threat from Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) than was justified by intelligence at the time, according to British and American government documents posted today by the National Security Archive.
With the aim of strengthening the political case for going to war, both governments regularly coordinated their assessments, the records show, occasionally downplaying and even eliminating points of disagreement over the available intelligence. The new materials, acquired largely through the U.K. Freedom of Information Act and often featuring less redacted versions of previously released records, also reveal that the Blair administration, far earlier than has been appreciated until now, utilized public relations specialists to help craft the formal intelligence “white papers” about Iraq’s WMD program.
At one point, even though intelligence officials were skeptical, the British went so far as to incorporate in their white paper allegations about Saddam’s nuclear ambitions because they had been made publicly by President Bush and Vice President Cheney.
The documents also show that:
* From early 2002 both governments were seeking regime change, but Prime Minister Blair and his officials were very conscious of the need to make a case for war, based on claims about Iraqi WMDs.
* From March 2002–the very beginning of the process–the U.S. and U.K. administrations were concerned to achieve consistency in their claims about Iraqi weapons, often at the cost of accuracy. In the spring of 2002 the two countries began to produce in parallel the white papers on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction that they published that fall. At least two drafts of the respective white papers were exchanged from either side in order to avoid providing grist for “opponents of action.”
* Officials working on the parallel papers took part in a number of secure video conferences to avoid inconsistencies between the documents. Both sides accelerated the drafting of their white papers in September 2002 as part of a coordinated propaganda effort.
* Officials re-drafting the U.K.’s white paper or “dossier” in September 2002 were told to ensure that it “complemented” rather than contradicted claims in the U.S. document. A draft of the U.K. dossier was brought to Washington by intelligence chief John Scarlett for U.S. input.
* In addition, U.K. officials examined the draft U.S. white paper closely and sought to match its claims. The U.S. paper has been described by one of its authors as intended “to strengthen the case of going to war with the American public.”
* The U.K. white paper was amended to incorporate a number of claims about Saddam’s alleged nuclear ambitions that intelligence officials found questionable but were included because President Bush and Vice President Cheney made public reference to them, for example the allegation that Iraq could obtain a nuclear weapon within a brief one- or two-year timeframe.
* The U.S. paper, which had omitted the same claims from an early draft, also included them after the President and Vice President’s public references to them.
* In addition, the U.K. dossier was heavily influenced by Blair advisers and public relations experts, including Alastair Campbell, Blair’s director of communications. Its drafters were also willing to change it to fit in with public statements from British government advisers, whether or not those statements were true.
Visit the Archive’s Web site for more information about today’s posting.
________________________________________________________
THE NATIONAL SECURITY ARCHIVE is an independent non-governmental research institute and library located at The George Washington University in Washington, D.C. The Archive collects and publishes declassified documents acquired through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). A tax-exempt public charity, the Archive receives no U.S. government funding; its budget is supported by publication royalties and donations from foundations and individuals.
At an international conference in London dubbed ‘Terrorism: alternative global perspectives’, Alan Hart, the author of ‘Zionism: the Real Enemy of the Jews’, stated that ‘The United States is supporting Israeli-sponsored terrorism in the Middle East’,
Speaking at the conference organized by the Center for the Study of Terrorism (CFSOT) in London to explore the comprehensive effects of the US ‘global war on terror’, he added that the Israeli regime, with blanket approval of Washington ‘simply ignores the United Nations resolutions concerning the violation of Palestinians’ rights’.
2 February 2006
Now as regular readers maybe aware I often have a go at the Independent for its crass and often just plain inaccurate reportage but in the edition of 31/1/06 it outdoes itself in deception, myopia and dissembling regarding the Bush presidency and its significance for those of us living in the real world.
13 June 2005
“The intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy’’ – Downing Street Memo, 23 July 2002
The Washington Post this morning is still at it. They quote that sentence, and they say, “Well, this is vague, but intriguing.” Well, there’s nothing vague about that at all, and it’s not at all intriguing. It’s highly depressing. Now, we veteran professionals, we professionals that toil long and hard in the intelligence arena are outraged at the corruption of our profession, but we are even more outraged by the constitutional implications here because as Congressman Conyers has just pointed out, we have here a very clear case that the Executive usurped the prerogatives of Congress of the American people and deceived it into permitting, authorizing an unauthorizeable war. – Ray McGovern, 27-year career analyst with the CIA and co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity.
As the memos pour forth from who knows where (somebody on the inside is obviously very pissed off with the actions of the Blair government), aside from the two articles in the Sunday Times, as far as I’ve been able to ascertain not a single mainstream media outlet in the UK has picked up on what is now known as DSM or the Downing Street Memos.
20 January 2005
In a shrinking world, which now faces the threat of atomic warfare, it is not an adequate objective merely to seek to check the Kremlin design, for the absence of order among nations is becoming less and less tolerable. This fact imposes on us, in our own interests, the responsibility of world leadership.
The US National Security Directive 68, April 1950
An awful lot of energy was expended in 2004 on the ‘Anybody But Bush’ debate, with the ABB brigade predicting really dire consequences if Bush got reelected (as opposed to just dire consequences if Kerry got the job). I tried to present the various for and against arguments here although my own opinion was (and still is) that it would make little difference as to who purchased the position given that the job of president is in any case pretty much that of a figurehead. Much more important is to understand what’s going on in the real centres of power that promoted both candidates.
19 November 2004 — Media Lens
Manufacturing The Myth Of ‘America’
American elites have long sought to manufacture and promote a shared myth of ‘America’ based on “symbols by which Americans defined their dream and pictured social reality.” (Alex Carey, Taking The Risk Out Of Democracy, UNSW Press, 1995, p.75)
Adam Curtis alluded to this myth-making in his BBC series The Power of Nightmares, but he portrayed it as a process initiated and pursued by neoconservatives from the 1940s onwards, inspired by the teachings of Leo Strauss.
30 July 2004
Review: Bush on the Couch: Inside the Mind of the President by Justin A. Frank, M.D.“We have to face the very real possibility that the President of the United States is loony tunes”
Unnamed GOP political consultant
The English, for whatever reason, have a deep distrust of anything to do with peering into the workings of the mind, let alone the mind of (nominally) the most powerful man on the planet, George W. Bush. And whatever one thinks of the many competing approaches to the nature of the mind – from the Jungian to the Freudian, RD Laing or whomever, gaining some insight into the workings of Bush’s brain may be useful to understanding the workings of overdue capitalism, if for no other reason than that of unpacking the addictive nature of the capitalist system and how the workings of an individual’s mind can be useful in the maintenance of the system, even one as batty as Bush’s.
20 April 2004
“All propaganda must be so popular and on such an intellectual level, that even the most stupid of those toward whom it is directed will understand it…. Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way around, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise.”
Adolf Hitler“I simply say to you”
Blair’s most used phrase.
Sometimes, writing about current events becomes just too much for me. After all, I’ve got feelings too you know. And the events of the past couple of weeks have not only stretched my analytic powers to their limits, my feeling of utter disgust at the hypocrisy never mind the lies, has reached an all-time low (or is it extreme?). Whatever, it strikes me that they get more brazen with every passing day in their utterances. Is it because they know we switched off ages ago or simply because they know there’s nothing we can do about any of it except whinge?
30 December 2003
“The only solution is for the Bush administration to return to foreign policy sanity, starting with a more cooperative, less vindictive approach to European allies who could help share America’s military burdens. ” – New York Times, Dec 29 2003
What could be clearer than this NYT editorial of the dire straights of US strategy under Bush. And when the NYT speaks it is speaking to (and for) the power elite. But will its voice be heeded and are the major powers of Europe (France and Germany) even listening?
The New Dark Age 