SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: lurqer who wrote (38249)2/22/2004 8:01:01 AM
From: lurqer  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Given the recent statements by Chalabi, almost gleefully remarking that he duped the Americans into going to war, it's interesting that

Unreliable group keeps U.S. support

By Jonathan S. Landay, Warren P. Strobel and John Walcott

Knight Ridder

WASHINGTON - The Department of Defense is continuing to pay millions of dollars for information from the former Iraqi opposition group that produced some of the exaggerated and fabricated intelligence President Bush used to argue his case for war.

The Pentagon has set aside between $3 million and $4 million this year for the Information Collection Program of the Iraqi National Congress, or INC, led by Ahmed Chalabi, said two senior U.S. officials and a U.S. defense official.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because intelligence programs are classified.

The continuing support for the INC comes amid seven separate investigations into prewar intelligence that Iraq was hiding illicit weapons and had links to Al-Qaida and other terrorist groups. A probe by the Senate Intelligence Committee is examining the INC's role.

The decision not to shut off funding for the INC's information gathering effort could become another liability for Bush as the presidential campaign heats up and furthermore suggests that some within the administration are intent on securing a key role for Chalabi in Iraq's political future.

Chalabi, who built close ties to officials in Vice President Cheney's office and among top Pentagon officials, is on the Iraqi Governing Council, a body of 25 Iraqis installed by the United States to help administer the country following the ouster of Saddam Hussein last April.

The former businessman, who lobbied for years for a U.S.-backed military effort to topple Saddam, is publicly committed to making peace with Israel and providing bases in the heart of the oil-rich Middle East for use by U.S. forces fighting the war on terrorism.

The INC's Information Collection Program started in 2001 and was ``designed to collect, analyze and disseminate information'' from inside Iraq, according to a letter the group sent in June 2002 to the staff of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Some of the INC's information alleged that Saddam was rebuilding his nuclear weapons program, which was destroyed by U.N. inspectors after the 1991 Persian Gulf War, and was stockpiling banned chemical and biological weapons, according to the letter.

The letter, a copy of which was obtained by Knight Ridder, said the information went directly to ``U.S. government recipients'' who included William Luti, a senior official in Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's office, and John Hannah, a top national security aide to Cheney.

The letter appeared to contradict denials made last year by top Pentagon officials that they were receiving intelligence on Iraq that bypassed established channels and verification procedures. The INC also supplied information from its collection program to leading news organizations in the United States, Europe and the Middle East, according to the letter to the Senate committee staff.

The State Department and the CIA, which soured on Chalabi in the 1990s, viewed the INC's information as highly unreliable.

mercurynews.com

lurqer



To: lurqer who wrote (38249)2/22/2004 8:48:23 AM
From: T L Comiskey  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
investorshub.com



To: lurqer who wrote (38249)2/22/2004 5:24:25 PM
From: Wharf Rat  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 89467
 
Well, at least I had just gotten home from the hospital. What's your excuse for being up at 0430?

The Luddite/Corporation argument is a good question, and I've given it some thought, not so much in the abstract as in my own case. Am I against GMOs for cause, or just on moral, ethical, and superstitious grounds?
I know the potential bennies of all this stuff. I also know the downside, and we've all learned that anthrax doesn't just stay in the lab. Are the dangers of cross-contamination real? Probably. Is GMO food with peanut genes dangerous to people with peanut allergies? It sure seems so. Has BT corn contaminated milkweed and thereby affected Monarch Butterflies? I think that is an open question.

Quite definitely, I think this heads us off into directions we maybe shouldn't be going. I worry about telling God we can design things better than she can. Icarus and Atlantis come to mind. Two of my ER docs are among the co-chairs, and I've talked to them about it. They tend to lean on the scientific dangers, and really worry about contamination. One is the County Health Officer. Also, the sheriff, a most cool man, is one of the leading proponents, although I can't recall if he is a co-chair, too.
We are heavily organic up here. Lots of organic vineyards, even. Most of the growers are backing this. I believe there is lab work going on with GM grapes, and they are worried. The other main (legal )crop is pears. I think some of the growers are proponents, but it shouldn't effect them, one way or the other. One of the pro ads said that same outside farm group came B4 the Supes, and said, if this passes, it would give our farmers an unfair advantage in the increasingly anti-GMO world. Awww. My heart bleeds.
This scares the industry. They went to court to keep it off the ballot. Their ads say this will cost us $ (new bureaucracy....BS). They are probably right, in that they will take this all the way to the Supreme Court to get rid of it. I've heard that SanapaNoma and maybe Marin are already circulating petitions for similar measures. Not a lot of in-county opposition, except for the Farm Bureau and a few left-over corporate (LP, GP) loggging types. And,...Crop-Life America (Bayer, Monsanto, etc), who are petrified. I think they will find out, that,for all their big bucks, we aren't like most of America, or even the Bay Area. This is way liberal up here, and, if people respond to their ads, it will be "Why is Monsanto messing in my local politics? Screw them, I'm voting Yes". I'll guess it will get 60% in favor.

One of their arguments is that farmers have been doing this (selective breeding) for centuries. I'm sorry, but,. when my ex bred her goat, I don't recall her being humped by a spider. Rat genes in potatoes? Human genes in fish? Farmers did that? Well, maybe human genes in sheep, but that's another story.

But, I digress... I don't think the Dems have peaked.I wouldn't be surprised by an OBL Oct. surprise, but it will be way too little and way too late. Too many moderate R's and indies have jumped ship, and I don't think they can stop it. Challengers can re-build their momentum after mis-steps. When the prez starts hemorrhaging, that is really tough to stop, especially in 6 months. The only choices are to cancel the elections or rig the machines. Not even Pimp Nader will help. Level Red alerts will be boring by then; cried wolf too often. Shrub will close the gap around convention time, 'cuz that is always what happens. but that will be his high water mark in the campaign.

WR

PS. Part of the reason the ad campaign won't work is that we have a lot of educated hippies up here. The brewery owner, and her hubby, the co-owner, are both biochemists, for instance.