Posts

Politicians and Voters in AmericaThe race has become earnest. Contenders are staking their positions, saying the usual things politicians do before elections. Most of them will, of course, change their course before November 2008. Rest assured, they will be flexible, adapt themselves to the scenario in Iraq and elsewhere, ready to do somersaults. It is hard to find one courageous, principled person among them.McCain is now more hawkish than the president, if such a thing is possible, and he has become a champion of tax cuts -- "a born again supply sider" as Novak described him in the Post. Hillary Clinton,unable or unwilling to come out with an explanation of her support for the war in 2002 is dancing around the issue. Playing it safe.In the din about the candidates and their statements, it is Gary Younge's comments from Washington in The Guardian that stood out. Yet, while admitting that I agree with most of Mr. Younge's observations, I cannot ignore what happened on November 7, 2006. Not a mandate but certainly a message from voters. It is unfortunate that candidates with their eyes on the prize are going forward without paying much attention to the last mid-term elections. Or perhaps they, and their campaign managers, know the system better than the voters.The US media is gripped by election fever - but discusses the candidates' highs and lows rather than the real social issuesGary Younge in WashingtonMonday February 5, 2007The Guardian"You want to run for president?" asked Frank Bruni in his book Ambling into History. "Here's what you need to do: Have someone write you a lovely speech that stakes out popular positions in unwavering language and less popular positions in fuzzier terms. Better yet if it bows to God and country at every turn - that's called uplift. Make it rife with optimism, a trumpet blast not just about morning in America but about a perpetual dazzling dawn. Avoid talk of hard choices and daunting challenges; nobody wants those. Nod to people on all points of the political spectrum ... Add a soupcon of alliteration. Sprinkle with a few personal observations or stories - it humanises you. Stir with enthusiasm."Watching the contenders for the Democratic party nomination at the Washington Hilton this weekend during the party's winter meeting was to see Bruni's formula applied with precision (though he might have added: "Have millionaire backers, be tall, married and able-bodied" - it is unlikely the wheelchair user FDR would have been elected in the era of mass television).The candidates were each allowed seven minutes, 30 seconds of theme music, and 100 poster-waving fans, to lay out their stall for the new American century. Each one spoke of how the nation's historic mission as a beacon of liberty, justice and opportunity throughout the globe, had been traduced by the Bush administration. There was nothing bad enough you could say about the Iraq war, the budget deficit or the state of healthcare. There was also nothing concrete that most of the candidates would say about what they would do to fix them. With little of substance on offer, delivery was everything. Barack Obama, who delivered beautifully, called for an end to cynicism in American politics. That's a lot of work for just seven minutes.Americans, such demanding consumers in every other aspect of their lives, curiously expect little from their political leaders. They hold the principle of democracy dear; but the purpose of democracy remains elusive. The notion that "the people shall govern" is the cornerstone of American political identity - even if the nonchalance with which they watched Bush steal the 2000 election revealed a disturbing reluctance to defend it. Yet the idea that elections should be the mechanism for effecting real change barely seems to register - which is why it was relatively easy for Bush to get away with robbery.The weekend before November's midterms, for example, I walked up the Las Vegas Strip asking people if they thought the coming elections mattered. Roughly one in five either did not know the elections were taking place or had no intention of voting. Yet precisely 100% said they thought the elections mattered. This dislocation is not particular to the US. For all its inadequacies, America's political culture has proved far more responsive to opposition to the war or corruption than Britain's. But both the popular attachment to democratic ideals and the general ambivalence to democratic outcomes are more intense, making the discrepancy more pronounced.Everybody knows that, if counted (a significant if), their vote will make a difference to who is actually elected. But few expect that whoever they elect will really make any difference to the issues they care about. And so voting takes on a ritualistic quality. Like Independence Day or Thanksgiving, it marks a date on the calendar not for changing America's politics, but for celebrating its promise.Whether one participates or not seems less important than the fact of the event itself. The consensus view of November's elections is that voters turned their back on the war and the Bush agenda and opted instead for a new course in favour of bipartisanship and troop withdrawal. But the truth is that most of them turned their back on the elections. The fact that, at only 42%, this was the highest midterm turnout for 36 years is merely an indication of how entrenched this condition has become. The so-called Gingrich revolution of 1994 was won with just 38.8% of the vote. In the words of Gil Scott-Heron: "The first thing I want to say is: mandate, my ass."The point here is not that there is no difference between the two main parties but that the difference is insufficient to make a significant impact on the lives of large numbers of Americans. The problem is not that people don't want or need change - the poorer you are, the less likely you are to vote - but that they have long since given up on the idea that voting is the way to get it.The future of the country was supposed to hinge on the outcome of the 2004 presidential election. But somehow the issues of poverty, racism and infrastructural decay that were evident in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina nine months later just never came up. By the time the midterms arrived, little over a year later, Katrina had somehow become irrelevant again.It's not difficult to see why. Elections are big business. Last year the parties spent $2bn on ads alone. Throw in the fees for thousands of lobbyists, consultants and fundraisers and the electoral-industrial complex starts to develop a momentum of its own. Hillary Clinton, who faced only token opposition in a Senate race she won by 30 points, still lavished $27,000 on valet parking and $13,000 on flowers. The people who provide this money have healthcare, housing and decent schools for their kids. They pay the pipers and name the tune.The mainstream media dances dutifully. Reporters somehow never encounter non-voters, instead constructing a country hotly debating the issues and weighing up the candidates. Obsessed by polls and personalities, they have a surreal fixation about who is up and who is down, with little indication of why we should care. They have barely digested the results of one election before they move on to devour the next. The morning after the midterms, with the fate of the Senate in the balance, CNN already had a banner along the bottom of its screen that read "America votes 2008". New York magazine hit the stands with a picture of Hillary Clinton on the cover and the words: "And now the real race begins".And so in the Washington Hilton the permanent campaign that transforms American politics into a never-ending soap opera continues. Four years ago a rank outsider, Howard Dean, made his name at this event with an anti-war speech that transformed the dynamics of the campaign. This year he wielded the gavel as the leader of the Democratic National Committee and everybody is against the war.It's almost two years until the presidential elections. We can only hope that between now and then progressive movements will again see the candidates' opportunism as their opportunity and bring their influence to bear on whoever decides to run. In the meantime, with little of substance to debate, the media are reduced to discussing strategy and style. Can the Democrats reclaim the west? Should they abandon the south? When will Obama's star fade? Are Hillary's positives greater than her negatives? Is America ready to elect a Mormon, a black man or a white woman? Enjoying the race, and ignoring what lies beyond the finish line.g.younge@guardian.co.uk

Names by Date - "Sorrowing Lies My Land"We lost 84 more men and women in uniform. This post is for them and for the ordinary Americans who had the courage to stand apart and oppose the war. Except for a few, our elected representatives cravenly swallowed the lies and fell in line behind the warmongers. Now they are trying to make amends. It is not too late to contain the losses. This is what the late Molly Ivins wrote shortly before her death on January 31st:"We are the people who run this country. We are the deciders. Every single day every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war. We need people in the streets banging pots and pans and demanding, 'Stop it now!' "Thomas E. Vandling Jr., 26, Army Sergeant, Jan 01, 2007Charles D. Allen, 28, Army Staff Sergeant, Jan 04, 2007Michael Lewis Mundell, 47, Army Reserve Major, Jan 05, 2007Jeremiah Johnson, 23, Army Corporal, Jan 06, 2007III, Raymond N. Mitchell, 21, Army Specialist, Jan 06, 2007Elizabeth A. Loncki, 23, Air Force Senior Airman, Jan 07, 2007Daniel B. Miller Jr., 24, Air Force Senior Airman, Jan 07, 2007Timothy R. Weiner, 35, Air Force Technical Sergeant, Jan 07, 2007Eric T. Caldwell, 22, Army Corporal, Jan 07, 2007Stephen J. Raderstorf, 21, Army Corporal, Jan 07, 2007Ryan R. Berg, 19, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 09, 2007Ming Sun, 20, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 09, 2007James M. Wosika Jr., 24, Army Sergeant, Jan 09, 2007Gregroy A. Wright, 28, Army Sergeant, Jan 13, 2007James D. Riekena, 22, Army Sergeant, Jan 14, 2007Paul T. Sanchez, 32, Army Sergeant, Jan 14, 2007Ian C. Anderson, 22, Army Sergeant, Jan 15, 2007John E. Cooper, 29, Army Sergeant, Jan 15, 2007Jason J. Corbett, 23, Army Specialist, Jan 15, 2007Mark J. Daily, 23, Army 2nd Lieutenant, Jan 15, 2007Matthew T. Grimm, 21, Army Corporal, Jan 15, 2007Collin R. Schockmel, 19, Army Specialist, Jan 16, 2007Joseph D. Alomar, 22, Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class, Jan 17, 2007Jennifer A. Valdivia, 27, Navy Petty Officer 1st Class, Jan 17, 2007William J. Rechenmacher, 24, Army Corporal, Jan 18, 2007Russell P. Borea, 38, Army Sergeant 1st Class, Jan 19, 2007Luis J. Castillo, 20, Marine Reserve Lance Corporal, Jan 19, 2007Jacob H. Neal, 23, Marine Reserve Corporal, Jan 19, 2007Brian D. Allgood, 46, Army Colonel, Jan 20, 2007Jeffrey D. Bisson, 22, Army Specialist, Jan 20, 2007Johnathan Bryan Chism, 22, Army Specialist, Jan 20, 2007Shawn Patrick Falter, 25, Army Private, Jan 20, 2007Sean P. Fennerty, 26, Army Sergeant, Jan 20, 2007Brian Scott Freeman, 31, Army Captain, Jan 20, 2007Jacob N. Fritz, 25, Army 1st Lieutenant, Jan 20, 2007Ryan J. Hill, 20, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 20, 2007Allen B. Jaynes, 21, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 20, 2007Jonathan P. C. Kingman, 21, Army Sergeant, Jan 20, 2007Victor M. Langarica, 29, Army Corporal, Jan 20, 2007Phillip D. McNeill, 22, Army Sergeant, Jan 20, 2007Jonathan Millican, 20, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 20, 2007Toby R. Olsen, 28, Army Specialist, Jan 20, 2007Daryl D. Booker, 37, Army National Guard Staff Sergeant, Jan 20, 2007John G. Brown, 43, Army National Guard Sergeant 1st Class, Jan 20, 2007David C. Canegata, 50, Army National Guard Lieutenant Colonel, Jan 20, 2007Marilyn L. Gabbard, 46, Army National Guard Sergeant Major, Jan 20, 2007Roger W. Haller, 49, Army National Guard Command Sergeant Major, Jan 20, 2007Paul M. Kelly, 45, Army National Guard Colonel, Jan 20, 2007Floyd E. Lake, 43, Army National Guard Staff Sergeant, Jan 20, 2007Sean E. Lyerly, 31, Army National Guard Captain, Jan 20, 2007Michael Taylor, 40, Army National Guard Major, Jan 20, 2007William T. Warren, 48, Army National Guard 1st Sergeant, Jan 20, 2007Darrel J. Morris, 21, Marine Corporal, Jan 20, 2007Brandon L. Stout, 23, Air National Guard Specialist, Jan 21, 2007Andrew G. Matus, 19, Marine Lance Corporal, Jan 21, 2007Emilian D. Sanchez, 20, Marine Lance Corporal, Jan 21, 2007Nicholas P. Brown, 24, Army Specialist, Jan 22, 2007Jamie D. Wilson, 34, Army Staff Sergeant, Jan 22, 2007Michael J. Wiggins, 26, Army Staff Sergeant, Jan 23, 2007Gary S. Johnston, 21, Marine Sergeant, Jan 23, 2007Michael M. Kashkoush, 24, Marine Sergeant, Jan 23, 2007Keith A. Callahan, 31, Army Sergeant 1st Class, Jan 24, 2007Hector Leija, 27, Army Staff Sergeant, Jan 24, 2007Michael Balsley, 23, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 25, 2007Alexander H. Fuller, 21, Army Sergeant, Jan 25, 2007Darrell W. Shipp, 25, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 25, 2007Mark D. Kidd, 26, Marine Reserve Corporal, Jan 25, 2007Nathan P. Fairlie, 21, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 26, 2007Alan R. Johnson, 44, Army Major, Jan 26, 2007Mickel D. Garrigus, 24, Army Sergeant, Jan 27, 2007Jon B. St. John II, 25, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 27, 2007Timothy A. Swanson, 21, Army Corporal, Jan 27, 2007David T. Toomalatai, 19, Army Private 1st Class, Jan 27, 2007Anthony C. Melia, 20, Marine Lance Corporal, Jan 27, 2007Cornell C. Chao, 36, Army Chief Warrant Officer, Jan 28, 2007Mark T. Resh, 28, Army Captain, Jan 28, 2007Carla J. Stewart, 37, Army Specialist, Jan 28, 2007Adam Q. Emul, 19, Marine Lance Corporal, Jan 29, 2007Alejandro Carrillo, 22, Marine Sergeant, Jan 30, 2007William M. Sigua, 21, Army Sergeant, Jan 31, 2007Stephen D. Shannon, 21, Army Reserve Corporal, Jan 31, 2007Source: Iraq Coalition Casualties

Use of U.S. Made Cluster Bombs by Israel * National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) Four months after reports in world press about Israel's use of cluster bombs in Lebanon, our State Department issued a statement. The Post: " WASHINGTON -- Israel likely misused American-made cluster bombs in civilian areas of Lebanon during the war against Hezbollah last summer, the State Department said Monday." The Guardian, UK: US studies Israel's cluster bomb use in LebanonMark TranMonday January 29, 2007Guardian UnlimitedIsrael may have violated agreements with Washington on the use of US-made cluster bombs in its war with Hizbullah in Lebanon last summer, the state department said today.The Bush administration must now decide what action, if any, to take against Israel for its use of the weapons against towns and villages from which Hizbullah fighters fired rockets.Opinion among US officials was divided, the New York Times reported at the weekend. The paper said some middle-ranking officials at the Pentagon and the state department were arguing that Israel had violated prohibitions on using cluster munitions against civilian areas.However, others in both departments thought Israel's use of the weapons was justified on the grounds of self-defence in a conflict that cost the lives of 159 Israeli soldiers and civilians, the paper said. At least 850 Lebanese died in the fighting.Tough action from the US is believed to be unlikely because of the White House's staunch support for the Israeli government.Cluster bombs scatter hundreds of small "bomblets", many of which fail to explode, over a wide area. Inquisitive children may later pick these up, or civilians could step on them.Israeli forces dropped an estimated 1m cluster bomblets in southern Lebanon last summer, 90% of which were dropped (pdf) in the last three days of the conflict, the group Landmine Action reported in October.Even if Israel is found to be in violation of its agreements with the US, it is up to George Bush to decide whether to impose sanctions unless Congress decides to take legislative action, a highly unlikely development.The state department is required to notify Congress of even the preliminary findings of possible violations of the Arms Export Control Act, the statute governing arms sales. It began an investigation in August.Whatever the US decides, Israel makes its own cluster munitions, so a cutoff of US supplies would be mainly symbolic.In 1982, the Reagan administration imposed a six-year ban on cluster bombs sales to Israel after a congressional investigation found Israel had used the weapons in civilian areas during its invasion of Lebanon that year.The UN and human rights groups strongly criticised Israel's use of cluster bombs at the end of the 2006 Lebanon conflict."What is shocking and completely immoral is 90% of the cluster bomb strikes occurred in the last 72 hours of the conflict, when we knew there would be a resolution," the UN humanitarian chief, Jan Egeland, said soon after the war ended.However, Israel said the use of cluster bombs was in accordance with international law and that its forces had not targeted civilians."The IDF [Israel Defence Force] does not deliberately attack civilians, and takes steps to minimise any incidental collateral harm by warning them in advance of an action, even at the expense of losing the element of surprise," the Israeli foreign ministry said last summer.Nevertheless, Israeli television reported in December that the military's judge advocate general was gathering evidence for possible criminal charges against military officers who may have given orders for cluster bombs to be dropped on populated areas.According to the UN mine action coordination centre for South Lebanon, by December 19, 18 people had been killed and 145 injured since the August ceasefire.The casualty rate has come down sharply. Immediately after the war, there were more than 30 casualties a week, but the figure now stands at around three or four.*New Report From The Folks Who Sold Us Saddam's WMDRelease of summary of the National Intelligence Estimate submitted to President Bush isn't going to make anyone feel good about the situation in Iraq. Mindful of the criticsm about its report about non-existent WMD in Iraq, the report tried to be objective -- "dissents are prominently displayed". What spin the White House is going to put on it? Karen DeYoung and Walter Pincus in The Washington PostA long-awaited National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, presented to President Bush by the intelligence community yesterday, outlines an increasingly perilous situation in which the United States has little control and there is a strong possibility of further deterioration, according to sources familiar with the document.In a discussion of whether Iraq has reached a state of civil war, the 90-page classified NIE comes to no conclusion and holds out prospects of improvement. But it couches glimmers of optimism in deep uncertainty about whether the Iraqi leaders will be able to transcend sectarian interests and fight against extremists, establish effective national institutions and end rampant corruption.Legislators have been equally critical of the intelligence community, repeatedly recalling that most of the key judgments in the October 2002 NIE on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were wrong. That assessment concluded that Saddam Hussein had amassed chemical and biological weapons and was "reconstituting" his nuclear weapons program. It became the foundation of the Bush administration's case -- and congressional authorization -- for invading Iraq."One of the sort of deeply held rumors around here is that the intelligence community gives an administration or a president what he wants by way of intelligence," Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) told Navy Vice Adm. John M. McConnell, Bush's nominee to be director of national intelligence, during McConnell's confirmation hearing yesterday.Without directly accepting Feinstein's premise, McConnell replied that the intelligence community had learned "meaningful" lessons over the past several years and that "there's very intense focus on independence." McConnell and others made clear that the new NIE on Iraq had been subjected to extensive competitive analysis to test its conclusions.One senior congressional aide said the NIE had been described to him as "unpleasant but very detailed." A source familiar with its language said it contained several dissents that are prominently displayed so that policymakers understand any disagreements within the intelligence community -- a significant change from the 2002 document, which listed most key dissents in small-type footnotes.Sen. Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), vice chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, pointedly told McConnell that "we are not going to accept national security issue judgment[s] without examining the intelligence underlying the judgments, and I believe this committee has an obligation to perform due diligence on such important documents." Previous committee attempts to obtain material to back up a 2005 NIE on Iran, Bond said, had "run into resistance."

Witty, Feisty, IrreverentRead about Molly Ivins' death from cancer at 62 with sadness. Yet, remembering some of her comments made me chuckle. She will be missed....not by the Bushies in Texas but she didn't give a damn about them. She didn't spare Democrats either. Her 1998 book "You Got to Dance with Them What Brung you" was about the Clinton years. This is what she wrote about the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesotta:"And what are we, the spiritual descendants of Puritans, to make of this monument to materialism? So much stuff it makes you sick to look at it, like eating too much cotton candy. Stores that sell only stuff to put your stuff in. Sub-specialties of stuff beyond the wildest dreams of most of the world's people. Should we not disapprove? Well, yeah. On the other hand, the pyramids were built for Pharaohs on the happy theory they could take their stuff with them. Versailles was built for kings on the theory that they should live surrounded by the finest stuff. The Mall of America is built on the premise that we should all be able to afford this stuff. It may be a shallow culture, but it's by-God democratic. Sneer if you dare; this is something new in world history."Katherine Seelye of the The NY Times, where Molly Ivins once worked as a reporter, covered the news very well. See excerpts.January 31, 2007Molly Ivins, Populist Texas Columnist, Dies at 62By KATHARINE Q. SEELYEIn her syndicated column, which appeared in about 350 newspapers, Ms. Ivins cultivated the voice of a folksy populist who derided those who acted too big for their britches. She was rowdy and profane, but she could filet her ideological opponents with droll precision.After Patrick J. Buchanan, as a conservative candidate for president, declared at the 1992 Republican National Convention that America was engaged in a cultural war, she said his speech “probably sounded better in the original German.”“There are two kinds of humor,” she told People magazine. One was the kind “that makes us chuckle about our foibles and our shared humanity,” she said. “The other kind holds people up to public contempt and ridicule. That’s what I do.”Her subject was Texas. To her, the Great State, as she called it, was “reactionary, cantankerous and hilarious,” and its legislature was “reporter heaven.” When the legislature was set to convene, she warned her readers: “Every village is about to lose its idiot.”Her Texas upbringing made her something of an expert on the Bush family. She viewed President George H.W. Bush benignly. (“Real Texans do not use the word ‘summer’ as a verb,” she wrote.)But she derided President George W. Bush, whom she first knew in high school. She called him Shrub and Dubya. With the Texas journalist Lou Dubose, she wrote two best-selling books about Mr. Bush: “Shrub: The Short but Happy Political Life of George W. Bush” (2000) and “Bushwhacked” (2003).In 2004 she campaigned against Mr. Bush’s re-election, and as the war in Iraq continued, she called for his impeachment. In her last column, earlier this month, she urged readers to “raise hell” against the war.Like her mother, Margot, and grandmother, Ms. Ivins went to Smith College in Massachusetts. Graduating in 1966, she also studied at the Institute of Political Science in Paris and earned her master’s degree at the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism.Ronnie Dugger, the former publisher of The Observer, said the political circus in Texas inspired her. “It was like somebody snapped the football to her and said, ‘All the rules are off, this is the football field named Texas, and it’s wide open,”’ he said.In 1976, her writing, which she said was often fueled by “truly impressive amounts of beer,” landed her a job at The New York Times. She cut an unusual figure in The Times newsroom, wearing blue jeans, going barefoot and bringing in her dog, whose name was an expletive.She quit The Times in 1982 after The Dallas Times Herald offered to make her a columnist. She took the job even though she loathed Dallas, once describing it as the kind of town “that would have rooted for Goliath to beat David.”But the paper, she said, promised to let her write whatever she wanted. When she declared of a congressman, “If his I.Q. slips any lower, we’ll have to water him twice a day,” many readers were appalled, and several advertisers boycotted the paper. In her defense, her editors rented billboards that read: “Molly Ivins Can’t Say That, Can She?” The slogan became the title of the first of her six books.Ms. Ivins learned she had breast cancer in 1999 and was typically unvarnished in describing her treatments. “First they mutilate you; then they poison you; then they burn you,” she wrote. “I have been on blind dates better than that.”But she continued to write her columns and continued to write and raise money for The Observer.Indeed, rarely has a reporter so embodied the ethos of her publication. On the paper’s 50th anniversary in 2004, she wrote: “This is where you can tell the truth without the bark on it, laugh at anyone who is ridiculous, and go after the bad guys with all the energy you have.”

Slimy Creatures and their WarVice President Cheney's former chief of staff "Scooter" Libby's trial for lying and obstructing justice in the CIA leak investigation brought out fascinating details of manipulation of media by the Bush Administration. One gets the impression that the journalists were often willing victims. They wanted fame and ready to pay the price for receiving tidbits from their "sources". Judith Miller, who had played a role in promoting the non-existent WMD stories in NY Times, was on the stand yesterday. Howard Kurz in the Washington Post:At a meeting in Libby's office in June 2003, Libby seemed "agitated and frustrated and angry," not to mention "annoyed," Miller said. He was concerned that the CIA, through a "perverted war of leaks," was distancing itself from its prewar intelligence about Saddam Hussein's illegal weapons.So Libby would combat these leaks by leaking to Miller, she explained in a tone that indicated this was the most natural thing in the world. Miller said he told her that the wife of Joseph C. Wilson IV, the former ambassador who was challenging the administration's account that Iraq had tried to buy enriched uranium in Africa, worked for "the bureau" -- prompting Miller to put a question mark in her notes until she realized that Libby meant the CIA.During a two-hour meal at the St. Regis hotel the following month, Miller said, Libby changed the ground rules and went "on deeper background," asking to be identified only as a "former Hill staffer."Miller recalled that in a phone conversation from her home in Sag Harbor, N.Y., she told him she did not plan to write a story about Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, and "didn't think the New York Times was interested in pursuing it."Why not? That has been one of the tale's lingering mysteries. Miller said she recommended to her boss, Jill Abramson, now the Times's managing editor, that the paper go after the Plame story, but "she seemed very distracted that day" and just said "mmm-hmm." Abramson has denied that Miller made such a recommendation.They may have shared secrets, but Miller and Libby were not exactly friends. When she ran into Libby in the summer of 2003 in Jackson Hole, Wyo., she did not recognize him -- because, she said, he was wearing glasses, a cowboy hat and boots, a black T-shirt and jeans. But once she was incarcerated in 2005, Libby began to convince Miller that he would not hold her to her vow of secrecy. He wrote a poetic letter reminding her that "the aspens will already be turning" while she languished in jail.After the Plame controversy blew up, Miller posted a letter on her Web site in response to a stinging piece by Times columnist Maureen Dowd, who said that Miller was not "credible" and had written "bogus" stories about nonexistent weapons. Recalling that yesterday, Miller said she told editors that "I did not think I had been a target" of a concerted White House leak campaign.Miller turned hesitant under cross-examination, stumbling over her words and repeatedly gesturing with her right hand. She admitted that she had forgotten her June 2003 meeting with Libby until she found the missing notes of their conversation.A frequent television guest, Miller got tripped up by one of her appearances. She stared at a monitor, transfixed and tight-lipped, as a program from last January showed her saying words that she had failed to fully recall a moment earlier: "It's really easy to forget details about a story you're not writing. . . . It was not important at the time."The videotape provided another reminder of why reporters much prefer asking questions to answering them.The day ended with legal wrangling about whether Miller could be asked to name other confidential sources. The issue, like the ambiguity of reporters' delicate dance with their informants, was not resolved.

"Any man's death diminishes me." -- John Donne© NEWSWEEK.com Audio commentary by Glenn Kutler of Iraq Coalition CasualtiesStaff Sgt.Hector Leija of Houston, TX, died in Baghdad on January 24th. He was 27. Heads of States give speeches, soldiers die. Nothing unusual about that. He is one among the 3081 who have lost their lives in the war that began in March 2003. Damien Cave's report about Sg. Leija's death made it very real, brought it close to home. But how many of us will think of Hector Leija a week from now? Sgt Leija will be remembered by his family and by his friends; the war will continue, others will die. Our warrior president might even have a surprise up his sleeve. His recent rhetoric is beginning to sound like prelude to another war.NY TimesJanuary 29, 2007‘Man Down’: When One Bullet Alters EverythingBy DAMIEN CAVEBAGHDAD, Jan. 28 — Staff Sgt. Hector Leija scanned the kitchen, searching for illegal weapons. One wall away, in an apartment next door, a scared Shiite family huddled around a space heater, cradling an infant.It was after 9 a.m. on Wednesday, on Haifa Street in central Baghdad, and the crack-crack of machine-gun fire had been rattling since dawn. More than a thousand American and Iraqi troops had come to this warren of high rises and hovels to disrupt the growing nest of Sunni and Shiite fighters battling for control of the area.The joint military effort has been billed as the first step toward an Iraqi takeover of security. But this morning, in the two dark, third-floor apartments on Haifa Street, that promise seemed distant. What was close, and painfully real, was the cost of an escalating street fight that had trapped American soldiers and Iraqi bystanders between warring sects.And as with so many days here, a bullet changed everything.It started at 9:15 a.m.“Help!” came the shout. “Man down.”“Sergeant Leija got hit in the head,” yelled Specialist Evan Woollis, 25, his voice carrying into the apartment with the Iraqi family. The soldiers from the sergeant’s platoon, part of the Third Stryker Brigade Combat Team, rushed from one apartment to the other.In the narrow kitchen, a single bullet hole could be seen in a tinted glass window facing north.The platoon’s leader, Sgt. First Class Marc Biletski, ordered his men to get down, away from every window, and to pull Sergeant Leija out of the kitchen and into the living room.“O.K., everybody, let’s relax,” Sergeant Biletski said. But he was shaking from his shoulder to his hand.Relaxing was just not possible. Fifteen feet of floor and a three-inch-high metal doorjamb stood between where Sergeant Leija fell and the living room, out of the line of fire. Gunshots popped in bursts, their source obscured by echoes off the concrete buildings.“Don’t freak out on me, Doc,” Sergeant Biletski shouted to the platoon medic, Pfc. Aaron Barnum, who was frantically yanking at Sergeant Leija’s flak jacket to take the weight off his chest. “Don’t freak out.”Two minutes later, three soldiers rushed to help, dragging the sergeant from the kitchen. A medevac team then rushed in and carried him to a Stryker armored vehicle outside, around 9:20. He moaned as they carried him down the stairs on a stretcher.The men of the platoon remained in the living room, frozen in shock. They had a problem. Sergeant Leija’s helmet, flak jacket, gear and weapon, along with that of at least one other soldier, were still in the exposed area of the kitchen. They needed to be recovered. But how?“We don’t know if there’s friendlies in that building,” said Sgt. Richard Coleman, referring to the concrete complex a few feet away from where Sergeant Leija had been shot. Sergeant Biletski, 39, decided to wait. He called for another unit to search and clear the building next door.The additional unit needed time, and got lost. The men sat still. Sergeant B, as his soldiers called him, was near the wall farthest from the kitchen, out of sight from the room’s wide, shaded window. Sergeant Woollis, Private Barnum, Sergeant Coleman and Specialist Terry Wilson sat around him.Together, alone, trapped in a dark room with the blood of their comrade on the floor, they tried to piece together what had happened. Maybe the sniper saw Sergeant Leija’s silhouette in the window and fired. Or maybe the shot was accidental, they said, fired from below by Iraqi Army soldiers who had been moving between the buildings.Sergeant Woollis cited the available evidence — an entrance wound just below the helmet with an exit wound above. He said the shot must have been fired from the ground.The Iraqis were not supposed to even be there yet. The plan had been for Sergeant Leija’s squad to work alongside an Iraqi Army unit all day. But after arriving late at the first building, the Iraqis jumped ahead, leaving the Americans and pushing north without searching dozens of apartments in the area.The Iraqi soldiers below the kitchen window had once again skipped forward. An American officer later said the Iraqis were brave to push ahead toward the most intense gunfire.But Sergeant Leija’s squad had no communication links with their Iraqi counterparts, and because it was an Iraqi operation — as senior officers repeatedly emphasized — the Americans could not order the Iraqis to get back in line. There was nothing they could do.9:40 a.m.An Iraqi soldier rushed in and then stopped, seemingly surprised by the Americans sitting around him. He stood in the middle of the darkened living room, inches away from bloody bandages on the carpet.“Get away from the window!”The soldiers yelled at their interpreter, a masked Iraqi whom they called Santana. Between their shouts and his urgent Arabic, the Iraqi soldier got the message. He slowly walked away.A few minutes later it happened again. This time, the Iraqi lingered.“What part of ‘sniper’ don’t you understand?” Sergeant Biletski yelled. The other soldiers cursed and called the Iraqis idiots. They were still not sure whether an Iraqi soldier was responsible for Sergeant Leija’s wound, but they said the last thing they wanted was another casualty. In a moment of emotion, Private Barnum said, “I won’t treat him if he’s hit.”When the second Iraqi left, an airless silence returned. The dark left people alone to grieve. “You O.K.? ” Sergeant B asked each soldier. A few nods. A few yeses.Private Barnum stood up, facing the kitchen, eager to bring back the gear left. One foot back, the other forward, he stood like a sprinter. “I can get that stuff, Sergeant,” he said. “I can get it.”The building next door had still not been cleared by Americans. The answer was no.“I can’t lose another man,” Sergeant B said. “If I did, I failed. I already failed once. I’m not going to fail again.”The room went quiet. Faces turned away. “You didn’t fail, sir,” said one of the men, his voice disguised by the sound of fighting back tears. “You didn’t fail.”9:55 a.m.The piercing cry of an infant was easily identifiable, even as the gunfire outside intensified. It came from the apartment next door. The Iraqi Army had been there, too. In an interview before Sergeant Leija was shot, the three young Iraqis there said that their father had been taken by the soldiers.“Someone from over there” — they pointed back away from Haifa Street, toward the rows of mud-brick slums — “told them we had weapons,” said a young man, who seemed to be about 18.He was sitting on a couch. To his right, his older sister clutched an infant in a blanket; his younger sister, about 16, sat on the other side.The young man said the family was Shiite. He said the supposed informants were Sunni Arabs who wanted their apartment.The truth of his claim was impossible to verify, but it was far from the day’s only confounding tip. Earlier that morning, an Iraqi boy of about 8 ran up to Sergeant Leija. He wanted to tell the Americans about terrorists hiding in the slums behind the apartment buildings on Haifa Street’s eastern side.Sergeant Leija, an easygoing 27-year-old from Raymondville, Tex., ignored him. He and some of his soldiers said it was impossible to know whether the boy had legitimate information or would lead them to an ambush.That summed up intelligence in Iraq, they said: there is always the threat of being set up, for an attack or an Iraqi’s own agenda.The Iraqi Army did not seem worried about such concerns, according to the family. The three young Iraqis said they were glad that the Americans had come. Maybe they could help find their father.10:50 a.m.Sergeant. Coleman tried using a mop to get the gear, and failed. It was too far away. With more than an hour elapsed since the attack, and after no signs of another shot through the kitchen window, Sergeant B agreed to let Private Barnum make a mad dash for the equipment.Private Barnum waited for several minutes in the doorway, peeking around the corner, stalling. Then he dove forward, pushing himself up against the wall near the window to cut down the angle, pausing, then darting back to the camouflaged kit.Crack — a single gunshot. Private Barnum looked back at the kitchen window, his eyes squeezed with fear. His pace quickened. He cleared the weapons’ chambers and tossed them to the living room. Then he threw the flak jackets and bolt cutters.He picked up Sergeant Leija’s helmet, cradled it in his arms, then made the final dangerous move back to the living room, his fatigues indelibly stained with his friend’s blood. There were no cheers to greet him. It was a brave act borne of horror, and the men seemed eager to go.As Private Barnum gingerly wrapped the helmet in a towel, it tipped and blood spilled out.11:15 a.m.Sergeant B sat down on a chair outside the two apartments and used the radio to find out if they would be heading back to base or moving forward. He was told to stay put until after an airstrike on a building 500 yards away.The platoon, looking for cover, returned to the Iraqis’ apartment, where they found the family as they were before — on the couch, in the dark, around the heater.Specialist Wilson continued the conversation he started before the gunshot two hours earlier. The young Iraqi man said again that the Iraqi Army had taken his father. “Will you come back to help?” he asked.“We didn’t take him,” Specialist Wilson said. “The I.A. took him. If he didn’t do anything wrong, he should be back.”The Iraqi family nodded, as if they had heard this before.Speaking together — none of them gave their names — they said they had lived in the apartment for 16 years. Ten days ago, before the Americans arrived, Sunnis told them they would kill every Shiite in the building if they did not leave immediately. So they fled to a neighborhood in southern Baghdad where some Shiites had started to gather in abandoned homes. But again, a threat came: leave or die. So less than a week ago, the family returned to Haifa Street.And now the airstrike was coming.Sergeant B told the family that they should go into a back room for safety. He asked if they wanted to take the heater with them (they did not), and he reminded everyone to keep their mouths open to protect their inner ears against the airstrike’s shockwave.A boom, then another even louder explosion hit, shaking dust from the walls. One of blasts came from a mortar shell that hit the building, the soldier said. The family stayed, but for the Americans, it was time to go.12:30 p.m.Over the next few hours, the platoon combined sprints across open alleyways with bouts of rest in empty makeshift homes. Under what sounded like constant gunfire, the soldiers moved behind the Iraqi soldiers, staying close.At one point, the Iraqis detained a man who they said had videos of himself shooting American soldiers. The Iraqi soldiers slapped him in the head as they walked him past.About an hour later, a sniper wounded two Iraqi soldiers who were mingling outside a squat apartment like teenagers at a 7-11. Private Barnum wrapped their wounds with American bandages. He and the rest of the platoon had been inside, taking cover.“Stay away from the windows,” Sergeant B kept repeating. The point was clear: don’t let it happen again. Don’t fail.4 p.m.Downstairs in the lobby of a mostly abandoned high rise on Haifa Street, the sergeant and his men sat on the floor, exhausted. They were waiting for their Stryker to return so they could head back to base. In 14 hours, they had moved through a stretch of eight buildings on Haifa Street. They had been scheduled to clear 18.Upstairs, Iraqi soldiers searched rooms and made themselves at home in empty apartments. Many were spacious, even luxurious, with elevators opening into wide hallways and grand living rooms splashed with afternoon sun.Under Saddam Hussein, Haifa Street had been favored by Baath Party officials and wealthy foreigners. The current residents seemed to have fled in an instant; in one apartment, a full container of shaving cream was left in the bathroom. In that apartment’s living room, a band of Iraqi soldiers settled in, relaxing on blue upholstered couches and listening to a soccer game on a radio they found in a closet.They looked comfortable, like they were waiting to be called to dinner.Sergeant B and Specialist Woollis, meanwhile, talked about what they would eat when they got back to their homes in California. The consensus was chili dogs and burgers.Sergeant B also said he missed his 13-year-old son, who was growing up without him, playing football, learning to become a man with an absentee father. After 17 years in the Army, he said, he was thinking that maybe his family had put up with enough.“I don’t see how you can do this,” he said, “and not be damaged.”A few hours later, the word came in: Sergeant Leija had died.

Nick's Bar in "The Time of Your Life" * A Wide-eyed Immigrant in 1969 * Clea BertaniWatching a video of the Broadway production of William Saroyan's The Time of Your Life, I thought of the City -- the late Herb Caen's Baghdad by the Bay -- that I fell in love with.In 1969, when I took the bus on weekday mornings from the old SP Depot at Third & Townsend, Third Street had a decrepit look. Pawn shops were prominent. If you walked on Third toward downtown, passing Brannan, Bryant, Harrison, Folsom, Howard, and Mission, you could not escape the smell of cheap liquor, urine, and unwashed bodies from groups of people who hung out at street corners. Those days some old timers referred to it as Frisco. That has become passé. Didn't sound right. To me it was always San Francisco.Third Street today is very different. The City has changed, become gussied up. It looks prosperous, very expensive to live in. But it is a magical place with breathtaking views. Herb Caen wrote in one of his columns that "San Francisco has the charms of Sydney, the style of London, and the rascality of Paris". Don't know about Sydney. I have been to Paris and London. Nothing comes close to the feeling I get when returning home to the Bay area I look down upon San Francisco as the aircraft begins to descend. The Time of Your Life (1976) TV,DVD© Amazon.comThe scene of Saroyan's play, The Time of Your Life, is a bar (Nick's Bar) on Pacific; the time 1939. A gritty place patronized by a cast of characters that gave the feeling of quintessential San Franciscans. Something quite believable about Harry, the mysterious, wealthy man ably played by Brooks Baldwin. Patti LuPone as the "2-dollar whore" Kitty Duval, was just right. If the City still has a bar like Nick's, chances are that the man behind the counter would be close to Nick in The Time of Your Life. Benjamin Hendrickson was real as can be. Kevin Kline did well in a cameo role as the longshoreman McCarthy.In declining the Pulitzer Prize for drama in 1940, awarded for The Time of Your Life, William Saroyan said that "art could not be patronized by wealth". The Human Comedy(1943), a movie based on a William Saroyan story, is another one that I remember. A small farming town in the San Joaquin Delta affected by war. Sixtyfour years later we have small towns in America suffering from losses in another war that is now raging in a far-off land, a war that America was led into by use of deception and lies.My love affair with San Francisco began long before I arrived in California. Movies that I watched back home left indelible impressions. Among them: Hitchcock's Vertigo (1958) and Stanley Kramer's Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967). I didn't think then that I would be working in San Francisco, walking and driving on streets that I had watched on screen.Kindness of Clea BertaniSan Francisco and its people were hospitable to me. I found a job, I found friends, and I discovered the charms of the City. Good restaurants, China Town, small book stores, the aroma of good tobacco at Grant's on Market Street (I used to be a pipe smoker before I started training to run marathons). Bali's Restaurant on Pacific was a favorite. The lamb shanks were superb. Mme Armen Bali had autographed photographs of ballet dancers on the walls. She counted Rudolf Nureyev and other Russian ballet stars among her friends. Peggy Knickerbocker's 1994 article, The Old Stoves of North Beach, is a mouthwatering trip through San Francisco's North Beach.Clea Bertani is someone I have a special reason to remember. Clea worked for Waterman Steamship Corp. Before coming to America I had sent out about a dozen resumes to companies in the ocean transportation business in San Francisco. Among the few responses was one from Clea Bertani. It was not the usual "regret" letter. Clea wrote that although Waterman didn't have any opening, The Guide, a local trade weekly, was running an ad for an operations assistant that might fit my background and that she had forwarded my application to The Guide. My application included a local address and telephone number. A few weeks after my arrival I received a call from the company that had advertised in The Guide. I followed through and got my first job. Some days later I walked into Waterman's office to thank Clea Bertani. She was warm and friendly just as I thought she would be when I read the letter that she took the time to write to a stranger in another country. Comments Müzmin Anonim — 2007-02-12 Hi, [Totally off topic to the current topic] I came here while looking for the original (i.e. Turkish) version of Ziya Pasha's 'beyit (a two-liner poem). And, I was pleasantly surprised to find one here. IMHO [emphasis on 'humble'], somewhat a better translation might be something like this: All I have taken is a drop. No more. The undiminished ocean still crowds the shore.. Though, I am translating from memory.I have read the original years ago (I am Turkish, but the 'beyit' was in old Turkish) but I can not locate where i have read it or where I can find it again. Anyway, here is another one you might like --which is more or less in the same vein: For thirty years my watch [has] kept ticking, but I Busy flying a kite, unaware of the sky.. Necip Fazil [ original: Tam otuz yıl saatim çalışmış ben durmuşum Gökyüzünden habersiz uçurtma uçurmuşum ] Anyway, 'musafir' (written as 'misafir') in Turkish means a guest, an esteemed visitor. Probably a Persian word. And a very nice alias. {I apologize for the off-topic. I just thought I'd drop a line or two} Anonymous — 2007-05-10 Ah, William Saroyan. Yet another one of my idols. Wrote one of the great koans of all time: "No foundation. All the way down the line." Never had the luck to visit San Francisco even though sister graduated from Berkeley. I suspect, however, that were I to ever get there, I wouldn't leave either. f Anonymous — 2009-08-14 Musafir comes from the Arabic word Al-Musafir which means the traveler.

The report in Washington Post about Mr. Frosty Hardison of Seattle and his battle with the Federal Way School Board is an example of the paranoia of fundamentalists. They will not let anyone or anything rob them from Armageddon. Be prepared for a loud whooshing sound when they go up to heaven. On second thought, the rest of us on earth might not be in a state to hear it.While President Bush appears to be softening his opposition to global warming, Mr. Hardison stands firm.Hardison, a parent of seven here in the southern suburbs of Seattle, hashimself roiled the global-warming waters. It happened early this month whenhe learned that one of his daughters would be watching "An InconvenientTruth" in her seventh-grade science class.No you will not teach or show that propagandist Al Gore video to my child,blaming our nation -- the greatest nation ever to exist on this planet --for global warming," Hardison wrote in an e-mail to the Federal Way SchoolBoard. The 43-year-old computer consultant is an evangelical Christian who says he believes that a warming planet is "one of the signs" of Jesus Christ's imminent return for Judgment Day.The school board rolled over without much of an argument.It drew following comments from KC, a friend:i guess what makes this story sad is that this is not happening inBackwardscreek, Alabama or Ridiculoso, Kansas; this story is set inSeattle, for crying out loud. The protagonist is not a gun-totingmoonshine-maker but a software programmer living in one of the bluerparts of the country.The inconvenient truth is not that the glaciers are melting, that isinconvenient only to the stupid people; the inconvenient truth is thatstupidity has no professional or geographical boundaries.But what I really really dont understand is that if you are someonewho "believes that a warming planet is "one of the signs of JesusChrist's imminent return for Judgment Day", then where is theinconsistency with Gore's film? Isn't the Gore film simply saying thatthe end is neigh ? Gore's film predicts global disaster coming off theevil of mankind; passages in the Book of Revelations, which is thebasis for all the Judgement day hoopla, says there cometh a Judgementday due to the evil in men's hearts. Where is the inconsistency ?Gore's film makes the further point that, though late in the game, ifmen wanted, they could forestall global distaster. Is Mr.Hardisonafraid men's actions could thwart God's plans ? Hell, the God Ibelieve in takes no shit from man. He is all powerfull and just an allround cool dude.If Mr.Hardison has such little faith in the power of his God over thewill of man, then maybe he should shift his allegiance to mine."Bigotry is the sacred disease" -- Heraclitus 6th Century BCE

Garry Wills' op-ed column "At Ease, Mr. President" in The NY Times brings up an issue that many Americans must have thought about in recent years -- role of the president as the commander-in-chief. Mr. Wills is not alone in his position that ".....the president is not our commander-in-chief". It is especially significant now because of the person who is our president and the abuses conducted by his administration, but regardless of who holds that office we ought to stop considering the president as commander-in-chief.The New York TimesJanuary 27, 2007At Ease, Mr. PresidentBy GARRY WILLSEvanston, Ill.WE hear constantly now about "our commander in chief." The word has become a synonym for "president." It is said that we "elect a commander in chief." It is asked whether this or that candidate is "worthy to be our commander in chief."But the president is not our commander in chief. He certainly is not mine. I am not in the Army.I first cringed at the misuse in 1973, during the "Saturday Night Massacre" (as it was called). President Richard Nixon, angered at the Watergate inquiry being conducted by the special prosecutor Archibald Cox, dispatched his chief of staff, Al Haig, to arrange for Mr. Cox's firing. Mr. Haig told the attorney general, Elliot Richardson, to dismiss Mr. Cox. Mr. Richardson refused, and resigned. Then Mr. Haig told the second in line at the Justice Department, William Ruckelshaus, to fire Cox. Mr. Ruckelshaus refused, and accepted his dismissal. The third in line, Robert Bork, finally did the deed.What struck me was what Mr. Haig told Mr. Ruckelshaus, "You know what it means when an order comes down from the commander in chief and a member of his team cannot execute it." This was as great a constitutional faux pas as Mr. Haig's later claim, when President Reagan was wounded, that "Constitutionally ... I'm in control."President Nixon was not Mr. Ruckelshaus's commander in chief. The president is not the commander in chief of civilians. He is not even commander in chief of National Guard troops unless and until they are federalized. The Constitution is clear on this: "The president shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States."When Abraham Lincoln took actions based on military considerations, he gave himself the proper title, "commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States." That title is rarely — more like never — heard today. It is just "commander in chief," or even "commander in chief of the United States." This reflects the increasing militarization of our politics. The citizenry at large is now thought of as under military discipline. In wartime, it is true, people submit to the national leadership more than in peacetime. The executive branch takes actions in secret, unaccountable to the electorate, to hide its moves from the enemy and protect national secrets. Constitutional shortcuts are taken "for the duration." But those impositions are removed when normal life returns.But we have not seen normal life in 66 years. The wartime discipline imposed in 1941 has never been lifted, and "the duration" has become the norm. World War II melded into the cold war, with greater secrecy than ever — more classified information, tougher security clearances. And now the cold war has modulated into the war on terrorism.There has never been an executive branch more fetishistic about secrecy than the Bush-Cheney one. The secrecy has been used to throw a veil over detentions, "renditions," suspension of the Geneva Conventions and of habeas corpus, torture and warrantless wiretaps. We hear again the refrain so common in the other wars — If you knew what we know, you would see how justified all our actions are.But we can never know what they know. We do not have sufficient clearance.When Adm. William Crowe, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, criticized the gulf war under the first President Bush, Secretary of State James Baker said that the admiral was not qualified to speak on the matter since he no longer had the clearance to read classified reports. If he is not qualified, then no ordinary citizen is. We must simply trust our lords and obey the commander in chief.The glorification of the president as a war leader is registered in numerous and substantial executive aggrandizements; but it is symbolized in other ways that, while small in themselves, dispose the citizenry to accept those aggrandizements. We are reminded, for instance, of the expanded commander in chief status every time a modern president gets off the White House helicopter and returns the salute of marines.That is an innovation that was begun by Ronald Reagan. Dwight Eisenhower, a real general, knew that the salute is for the uniform, and as president he was not wearing one. An exchange of salutes was out of order. (George Bush came as close as he could to wearing a uniform while president when he landed on the telegenic aircraft carrier in an Air Force flight jacket).We used to take pride in civilian leadership of the military under the Constitution, a principle that George Washington embraced when he avoided military symbols at Mount Vernon. We are not led — or were not in the past — by caudillos.Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan's prescient last book, "Secrecy," traced the ever-faster-growing secrecy of our government and said that it strikes at the very essence of democracy — accountability of representatives to the people. How can the people hold their representatives to account if they are denied knowledge of what they are doing? Wartime and war analogies are embraced because these justify the secrecy. The representative is accountable to citizens. Soldiers are accountable to their officer. The dynamics are different, and to blend them is to undermine the basic principles of our Constitution.Garry Wills, a professor emeritus of history at Northwestern, is the author, most recently, of "What Paul Meant."

The Fictitious Yellow Cake (Uranium) from Niger "Scooter" Libby's trial for perjury in the investigation about the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame revealed fascinating facts. Former vice presidential aide Cathy Martin's testimony left no doubt that Vice President Cheney was deeply involved in smearing former Ambassador Joseph Wilson because his report, after being sent to investigate Iraq's acquisition of uranium from Niger, proved embarrassing to the Bush Administration. Vice President Cheney micro-managed the efforts to contain the fallout. On the other side of the picture was the division between aides at the White House and the vice president's office.The GuardianMr Wilson had been sent to Africa to investigate reports that Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium from Niger for his nuclear weapons programme. He reported back to the state department and the CIA that the reports were untrue, yet the claim surfaced in George Bush's state of the union speech in January, 2003. * What the President said (after Ambassador Wilson had submitted his report) in his State of the Union address, January 28, 2003:"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide." * Ms Martin, currently employed in the White House, knew where the skeletons were buried and she did not hold back.George Tenet, the Fall Guy. Maybe that explains the Presidential Medal of Freedom.Washington PostAt length, Martin explained how she, Libby and deputy national security adviser Steve Hadley worked late into the night writing a statement to be issued by George Tenet in 2004 in which the CIA boss would take blame for the bogus claim in Bush's State of the Union address that Iraq was seeking nuclear material in Africa.After "delicate" talks, Tenet agreed to say the CIA "approved" the claim and "I am responsible" -- but even that disappointed Martin, who had wanted Tenet to say that "we did not express any doubt about Niger." Comments Anonymous — 2007-01-26 Keep giving them hell Musafir.