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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: geode00 who wrote (171461)9/29/2005 6:49:17 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Media Finally Sees Through Bush's 'Number 2 Man' Myth

by Scott Shields

Ever notice how many times the Bush administration and the Pentagon tout the killing or capture of high level al Qaeda operatives? Just how many 'Number 2,' 'Number 3,' and 'Number 4' men can bin Laden and Zarqawi possibly have, anyway? I know, I know. It's an old joke. But while we may realize that, the media has seemed completely incapable of recognizing that maybe not every al Qaeda figure we eliminate is as important as the administration claims he is.

In an online-only piece for Newsweek, Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball delve into the claim that Abu Azzam, a terrorist recently killed in Iraq, was Zarawi's number two man. Speaking in the Rose Garden this morning, Bush made just such a claim:

"...Iraqi and coalition forces tracked down and killed Abu Azzam, the second most wanted al Qaeda leader in Iraq. This guy is a brutal killer. He was one of Zarqawi's top lieutenants. He was reported to be the top operational commander of al Qaeda in Baghdad. He is one of the terrorists responsible for the recent upsurge in attacks in the Iraqi capital..."

Isikoff and Hosenball ran down the information and found that's not really the case. Abu Azzam may have been important, especially in Baghdad, but there are serious holes in the claim that he was anywhere close to being second in command for all of Iraq:

"But veteran counterterrorism analyst Evan Kohlmann said today there are ample reasons to question whether Abu Azzam was really the No. 2 figure in the Iraqi insurgency. He noted that U.S. officials have made similar claims about a string of purportedly high-ranking terrorist operatives who had been captured or killed in the past, even though these alleged successes made no discernible dent in the intensity of the insurgency.

'If I had a nickel for every No. 2 and No. 3 they've arrested or killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, I'd be a millionaire,' says Kohlmann, a New York-based analyst who tracks the Iraq insurgency and who first expressed skepticism about the Azzam claims in a posting on The Counterterrorism Blog (counterterror.typepad.com). While agreeing that Azzam--also known as Abdullah Najim Abdullah Mohamed al-Jawari--may have been an important figure, 'this guy was not the deputy commander of Al Qaeda,' says Kohlmann.

Three U.S. counterterrorism officials, who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the subject, also told NEWSWEEK today that U.S. agencies did not really consider Abu Azzam to be Zarqawi's "deputy" even if he did play a relatively high-ranking role in the insurgency."

On my own, referring to nothing more than the CENTCOM press release announcing the warrant for Abu Azzam's arrest, I checked out the rewards being offered for certain figures linked to Zarqawi. It would make sense that the more important someone is, the higher the reward for his capture would be.

Out of 29 wanted terrorists listed in the warrant, no one has a smaller reward offered for his capture than Abu Azzam. In fairness, he's tied for last place with ten others. However, the $50,000 offered for Abu Azzam pales in comparison to the $25 million, $10 million, $1 million, and $200,000 offered for others. If he was "the second most wanted al Qaeda leader in Iraq," as Bush referred to him, why such a small reward?

With Bush's poll numbers in the toilet and Tom DeLay about to be indicted, it wasn't at all surprising that this claim was made this morning. When Bush needs good news and there isn't any to be had, they just make it up. But promoting Abu Azzam to such a position of importance? There must be sheer desperation at the White House if they're stretching this far. Nice to see that at least some in the media aren't biting this time.

mydd.com



To: geode00 who wrote (171461)9/29/2005 4:27:47 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
Bush's Presidency Is Exposed, Crumbling

by Margaret Carlson
Columnist
Published on Thursday, September 29, 2005 by Bloomberg.com

Back in the days when President George W. Bush preferred his endless summer at the ranch to storm chasing, few mistakes stuck to him. He was like the guy who drove through the car wash with his top down but never got wet.

No weapons of mass destruction in a country we're stuck in? Well, you must understand, he really thought they were there. At this year's White House Correspondents' Association dinner, Bush showed a video of himself pretending to look for the weapons under his desk.

Oh what a difference a hurricane makes. Katrina exposed something we couldn't know before: Bush's claim that he would keep us safer than that wishy-washy senator from squishy Massachusetts is false. Not only are we not safer than we were before Bush took office, we're worse off.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency, as its Katrina response made tragically clear, is a mess. The Department of Homeland Security, which Bush built from scratch, is mainly known for a color chart, wasteful spending, a mixed bag of airport screeners and a new chief who didn't know the New Orleans Superdome was filled with starving, homeless hurricane victims.

Duct Tape Defense

Here in Washington, there's no feasible evacuation plan. If terrorists struck, the president and vice president would helicopter out. The rest of us -- and that includes many members of Congress -- would be stuck.

I picture myself with duct tape and Saran Wrap, huddling in the basement or in a VW with a leaking sunroof idling for hours on the 14th Street Bridge.

The White House press, which laughed at Bush's video, has been rightly chastised for turning out pool reports on what the president is wearing, eating or chopping. Now they're pounding away at his multiple fuel-squandering trips to hurricane-stricken regions where he can repair little but himself.

A pool report on Sept. 26, the day Bush discovered energy conservation and suggested we all forgo non-essential driving, detailed the gas-sucking trip he took that evening to dinner five blocks away from the White House, commandeering five sport- utility vehicles, four vans and two limousines that kept their motors running for the duration of the meal.

Brown's Lament

Until recently, Bush's attitude toward governing -- it's easy, don't sweat the small stuff, do it on the cheap -- was tolerated, if not admired.

Why not pick Michael Brown, a guy who knows a guy, even to run a life-or-death agency like FEMA? Why not, after he screws up big time, praise him? Why not, after you finally ease him out, keep paying him as a consultant?

At the Kabuki hearings two days ago that pretended to get to the bottom of the fiasco, Republicans who'd been given the word by Karl Rove to concentrate on scapegoating and Swift-Boating Louisiana's Democratic Governor Kathleen Blanco were shocked by Brown's arrogance.

Brown said faith-based institutions, not FEMA, were supposed to help low-income people and that he warned folks higher up the food chain that FEMA was ``emaciated.'' In one Rodney King moment, he said everything would have been fine if only Louisiana officials had all gotten along.

It didn't work. When Republican Christopher Shays, off Rove's script, said he was glad Brown was gone, Brown whined, ``I guess you want me to be this superhero that is going to step in there and suddenly take everybody out of New Orleans.''

And Now DeLay

The unmasking of Brown may force Bush to withdraw the nomination of another pal of a pal to head up a crucial agency, Immigration and Naturalization. Pre-hurricane, Julie Myers, General Richard Myers's niece and the wife of the chief of staff of Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, would have sailed through.

It wouldn't have mattered before, but now her non-relevant experience working on Bill Clinton's impeachment and her lack of relevant experience working on immigration may hold her up.

In the realm of when it rains, it pours, other pillars of Bush's carefully constructed world are crumbling. The latest is Tom DeLay, the majority leader who yesterday was indicted for campaign contributions that helped give Bush four more Republicans in the House of Representatives.

Even Bush's hand-picked Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist wouldn't be taking quite such a pummeling if his sale of stock in his family founded HCA Inc. had happened during Bush's glory days. Both the Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission are investigating.

Lights Out

Frist, who always contended he didn't even know if his blind trust held HCA stock, had an imminent need to sell what he didn't know he owned just before its price fell almost 10 percent this summer. He may not be Martha Stewart, but his new-found desire, after two terms in office, to avoid a conflict of interest when he considers health-care legislation no longer gets a pass.

When your mojo fades, little things mean a lot. Two days ago, White House press spokesman Scott McClellan said the president is so gung-ho on saving energy (this after a previous spokesman said Bush's answer to the prospect of energy conservation was a ``big N-O''), he's personally reminding staff ``to turn off lights and printers and copiers and computers when they leave the office.''

Someone should remind the president of an earlier chief executive whose decline was hastened when he made a point of turning down the thermostat and donning a cardigan. When you elevate the trivial to policy because the meaningful stuff has gotten away from you, someone will soon be turning the lights out for you.

commondreams.org



To: geode00 who wrote (171461)9/29/2005 5:38:07 PM
From: Don Hurst  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 281500
 
Some American "stay the course" guy was just on NPR talking about the importance of American "credibility" in Iraq and then he closed with this "It is important that we not leave Iraq worse off then we found it and we are are not there yet"!!!!

My gosh, 2000 plus Americans dead, thousands maimed, countless Iraqis dead plus $200Bn and counting down the drain and Iraq is worse off now then under Saddam.

Yup, we must honor the American dead by having more killed so that we can get Iraq back to square one. This is total madness.

Bush should be impeached.