NAVIGATION MAIN MENU

COMPENDIUM LIBRARY/TWITTER MONITOR
VIDEO GALLERY
Economic News
Newsbrief Archives
Democrat Leadership Twitter and Realtime Feeds
Cabinet twitter and realtime feeds
North America weblog
International weblog
Democrats twitter directory
Latest Government Jobs and Public Tenders
Jobs Matrix
Global Travel Information
Pop Entertainment Forum
Start Portal


Please make a donation to support upkeep of the daily news journal, back archives, twitter feeds and the compendium library.










April 8, 2004

Daily newsbrief journal for April 2004, also see http://www.usdemocrats.com/brief for a global 100-page perpetual brief and follow twitter @usdemocrats


Re: April 8, 2004

Postby admin » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:13 am

New Evidence Bush Pushed Iraq War Right After 9/11« Thread Started on Apr 8, 2004, 2:04am »--------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: Gandalf Grey (gandalfgrey@infectedmail.com)Subject: New Evidence Bush Pushed Iraq War Right After 9/11 This is the only article in this thread View: Original Format Newsgroups: alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater, alt.current-events.wtc.bush-knew, alt.impeach.bush, alt.politics, alt.politics.bush, alt.politics.liberalism, alt.society.liberalism, talk.politics.miscDate: 2004-04-07 11:52:36 PST April 6, 2004New Evidence Bush Pushed Iraq War Right After 9/11The White House continues to deny that the president immediately beganplanning an invasion of Iraq in the days after 9/11, calling such charges"revisionist history" and claiming Iraq was "to the side" immediatelyafter the attacks. But new revelations by a former top British officialconfirm that, immediately after 9/11, President Bush started planning to usethe terrorist attacks as a justification for war in Iraq, despite having noproof that Iraq had any connection to Al Qaeda or 9/11According to a report in the new edition of Vanity Fair, former BritishAmbassador to the United States Christopher Meyer said that President Bushmade clear at a dinner with Prime Minister Tony Blair nine days after theSept. 11 attacks that he wanted to confront Iraq. The assertion iscorroborated by the Washington Post, which reported that President Bushpersonally signed a two-and-a-half page directive on September 17th, 2001ordering the Pentagon to begin drawing up Iraq invasion plans. Theassertion is also corroborated by CBS News, which reported on September 4,2002 that, five hours after the 9/11 attacks, "Defense Secretary DonaldRumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq."The account by the former British Ambassador confirms similar accounts byformer Bush counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke and former TreasurySecretary Paul O'Neill.The result of President Bush's preoccupation with Iraq has been dramatic:the diversion of critical resources to Iraq and away from the hunt for Osamabin Laden/Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. As reported by USA Today, "In 2002,troops from the 5th Special Forces Group who specialize in the Middle Eastwere pulled out of the hunt for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan to preparefor their next assignment: Iraq." Similarly, Senator Bob Graham (D-FL)reported that, in February 2002, a senior military commander told him, "Weare moving military and intelligence personnel and resources out ofAfghanistan to get ready for a future war in Iraq." That has left manydangerous terrorists still at large, and the UN now reporting that thecountry is "in danger of reverting to a terrorist breeding ground."Sources:White House Press Briefing, 3/23/04."Neither Silent Nor a Public Witness," Washington Post, 3/26/04."Doubts cast on efforts to link Saddam, al-Qaida," Knight-Ridder, 3/2/04."Report Details Bush-Blair Meeting on Iraq," Associated Press, 4/4/04."U.S. Decision On Iraq Has Puzzling Past," Washington Post, 1/12/03."Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11," CBS News, 9/4/02."Shifts from bin Laden hunt evoke questions," USA Today, 3/28/04."Senator Bob Graham Remarks to the Council on Foreign Relations," Council onForeign Relations, 3/26/04."UN warns on Aghanistan reverting to terrorism," Financial Times, 3/28/04.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am



Re: April 8, 2004

Postby admin » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:13 am

Kennedy Likens Bush to Nixon 'Credibility Gap' « Thread Started on Apr 8, 2004, 1:58am »--------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: Eltanin (eltanin@boxfrog.com)Subject: Kennedy Likens Bush to Nixon 'Credibility Gap'View this article only Newsgroups: soc.culture.israel, alt.politics.republicans, alt.impeach.bush, alt.society.conservatism, alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics, soc.culture.iraq, alt.politics.gw-bushDate: 2004-04-07 13:52:58 PSTKennedy Likens Bush to Nixon 'Credibility Gap'Mon Apr 5, 2004 05:44 PM ETBy Thomas FerraroWASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy on Monday accusedPresident Bush of having created at home and abroad "the largestcredibility gap" since the Watergate scandal forced Richard Nixon fromthe White House 30 years ago.Kennedy, a key backer of fellow Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry'scampaign for the party's presidential nomination, also charged Iraq hasbecome "George Bush's Vietnam," the war that divided the United Statesand helped drive Lyndon Johnson from the presidency.In addition, Kennedy said, Iraq has "diverted attention from theadministration's deceptions here at home -- especially on the economy,health care and education."In delivering perhaps his harshest assessment yet of Bush, Kennedydescribed the Republican president as someone who cannot be trusted ona host of fronts.Kennedy, the leading liberal on Capitol Hill, renewed his charge thatthe administration had misled the American people and Congress into theIraq war, straining relations with allies worldwide.He also accused the administration of having knowingly sold an unsoundtax-cutting economic plan that resulted in the loss of millions ofjobs, a faulty Medicare prescription drug law that will cost far morethan it acknowledged when the measure won final congressional passagelate last year and an education program that Kennedy said Bush hasrefused to adequately fund."Sadly, this administration has failed to live up to basic standards ofopen and candid debate," Kennedy said in a speech at the BrookingsInstitution, a Washington think tank.INVENT 'FACTS'"They repeatedly invent 'facts' to support their preconceived agenda --facts which administration officials knew or should have known were nottrue," Kennedy said.The senator said, "As a result, this president has now created thelargest credibility gap since Richard Nixon," who was forced to resignas president in 1974 as a result of the Watergate scandal that exposedabuses of power.Terry Holt, a spokesman for the Bush campaign, said, "It is obviousthat Sen. Kerry has appointed Sen. Kennedy to be his chief politicalhatchetman."Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican, took thefloor of his chamber to defend Bush and blast Kennedy."We need to focus on rooting out global terrorism by fighting theterrorists, and not each other," McConnell said. "But ... the politicalseason is upon us."In challenging Bush's credibility, Kennedy repeated a central theme ofKerry's own attacks on the incumbent.Just months ago, Kennedy helped pump new life into Kerry's thensputtering campaign for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination.Kennedy has since remained a force in Kerry's bid to unseat Bush in theNovember elections.Kennedy went after the Bush administration for pushing what he calledmisleading policies, as well as for attacking critics of thosepolicies."Iraq. Jobs. Medicare. Schools," Kennedy said. "Issue after issue.Mislead. Deceive. Make up the needed facts. Smear the character of anycritic.""It is undermining our national security, undermining our economy,undermining our health care ... undermining our very democracy,"Kennedy said. "We need change. November can't come soon enough."
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am



Re: April 8, 2004

Postby admin » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:14 am

Criminal lies by the White House is unacceptable « Thread Started on Apr 8, 2004, 1:56am »--------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: - (jazzerciser@hotmail.com)Subject: Secrets and Lies Becoming Commonplace ( Walter Cronkite ) View this article only Newsgroups: alt.politics, alt.politics.republicans, alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.politics.democrats.d, alt.politics.greens, alt.impeach.bush, alt.conspiracyDate: 2004-04-07 13:22:59 PSThttp://www.commondreams.org/views04/ ... mPublished on Monday, April 5, 2004 by CommonDreams.orgSecrets and Lies Becoming Commonplaceby Walter CronkiteThe initial refusal of President Bush to let his national securityadviser appear under oath before the 9/11 Commission might have beenin keeping with a principle followed by other presidents -- theprinciple being, according to Bush, that calling his advisers totestify under oath is a congressional encroachment on the executivebranch's turf.(Never mind that this commission is not a congressional body, but onehe created and whose members he handpicked.)But standing on that principle has proved to be politically damaging,in part because this administration -- the most secretive sinceRichard Nixon's -- already suffers from a deepening credibilityproblem. It all brings to mind something I've wondered about for sometime: Are secrecy and credibility natural enemies?When you stop to think about it, you keep secrets from people when youdon't want them to know the truth. Secrets, even when legitimate andnecessary, as in genuine national-security cases, are what you mightcall passive lies.Take the recent flap over Richard Foster, the Medicare official whoseboss threatened to fire him if he revealed to Congress that theprescription-drug bill would be a lot more expensive than theadministration claimed. The White House tried to pass it all off asthe excessive and unauthorized action of Foster's supervisor (whoshortly after the threatened firing left the government).Maybe. But the point is that the administration had the newer, highernumbers, and Congress had been misled. This was a clear case ofsecrecy being used to protect a lie. I can't help but wonder how manyother faulty estimates by this administration have actually beenmisinformation explained as error.The Foster story followed by only a few weeks the case of the U.S.Park police chief who got the ax for telling a congressional staffer-- and The Washington Post -- that budget cuts planned for herdepartment would impair its ability to perform its duties. Chief TeresaChambers since has accepted forced retirement from government service.Isolated incidents? Not really. Looking back at the past three yearsreveals a pattern of secrecy and of dishonesty in the service ofsecrecy. Some New Yorkers felt they had been lied to following thehorrific collapse of the World Trade Center towers. Proposed warningsby the Environmental Protection Agency -- that the air quality nearground zero might pose health hazards -- were watered down or deletedby the White House and replaced with the reassuring message that theair was safe to breathe.The EPA's own inspector general said later that the agency did nothave sufficient data to claim the air was safe. However, thereassurance was in keeping with the president's defiantback-to-work/business-as-usual theme to demonstrate the nation'sstrength and resilience. It also was an early example of a Bushadministration reflex described by one physicist as "never let scienceget in the way of policy."In April 2002, the EPA had prepared a nationwide warning about a brandof asbestos called Zonolite, which contained a form of the substancefar more lethally dangerous than ordinary asbestos. However,reportedly at the last minute, the White House stopped the warning.Why? The St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which broke the story, noted thatthe Bush administration at the time was pushing legislation limitingthe asbestos manufacturer's liability. Whatever the reason, suchsilence by an agency charged with protecting our health is a silentlie in my book.One sometimes gets the impression that this administration believesthat how it runs the government is its business and no one else's. Itis certainly not the business of Congress. And if it's not thebusiness of the people's representatives, it's certainly no businessof yours or mine.But this is a dangerous condition for any representative democracy tofind itself in. The tight control of information, as well as thedissemination of misleading information and outright falsehoods,conjures up a disturbing image of a very different kind of society.Democracies are not well-run nor long-preserved with secrecy and lies.Walter Cronkite was anchor of "CBS Evening News" for 19 years.###1997-2003www.commondreams.org
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am



Re: April 8, 2004

Postby admin » Thu Jan 26, 2012 7:14 am

Bring Our Troops Home And Send In The U.N. « Thread Started on Apr 8, 2004, 1:52am »--------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: ren1999 \(Felix The Cat\) (ren1999@hotmail.com)Subject: Bring Our Troops Home Or Send In The U.N.View this article only Newsgroups: alt.politicsDate: 2004-04-07 18:35:51 PSTWe in America are tired of this. It is time for Bush to stop trying tocontrol Iraqi Oil by keeping the U.N. out. It is time for the U.N. to stepinto Iraq to restore peace.
admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 82092
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 7:00 am

Previous

Return to April 2004

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron