much the public demands they truly confront the Bush
administration's criminality.
Just in the first three weeks of the session, Senate Democrats plan
to call at least 13 hearings on Iraq.[1] On the House side, Rep.
John Murtha has promised to hold two hearings a day for several
months beginning on January 17th, and many others are planned as
well.
The Democrats' investigations could follow either of two
strategies. One is to use hearings simply to service their '08
election goals by revealing some blemishes in Bush's Iraq policy --
while letting the war, torture,spying, and other crimes continue
unimpeded. The alternate is to investigate with the intent of
driving a dagger into the soft underbelly of the Bush juggernaut --
its criminal violation of the U.S. Constitution and U.S. and
international law and its criminal coverup of its abuses.
Just after the elections the Justice Department, in response to an
ACLU suit, disclosed in court the existence of directives from the
President and the CIA General Counsel that may have authorized
torture and other illegal interrogation techniques. Sen. Patrick
Leahy, incoming chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, immediately
wrote Attorney General Alberto Gonzales requesting the documents and
related records. On January 2, Leahy released a letter from the
Justice Department refusing to provide the documents on grounds of
national security and executive privilege.
Leahy decried the refusal and added, "I have advised the Attorney
General that I plan to pursue this matter further at the Committee's
first oversight hearing of the Department of Justice."
Rep. John Conyers' mobilization of popular support for demanding
information about the Downing Street memos represents on a small
scale what will need to be done on a larger
scale.
A plausible scenario looks something like this:
--A congressional committee will request information.
--The Administration will stonewall.
--The committee will issue a subpoena.
--Amidst a sea of justifications and vilifications, the
Administration
will fail or refuse to produce documents.
--The committee will pass a contempt citation.
--The Senate or House will pass a contempt citation.
--The contempt citation will be referred to the Justice
Department.
--The Justice Department will fail or refuse to bring contempt
charges.
At that point Congress will have several options:
--It can make angry noises while in actuality accepting
Administration
intransigence.
--It can pass legislation establishing a special prosecutor.
--It can appeal to the courts by suing the Administration.
--It can establish a select committee or otherwise threaten
impeachment against whatever officials it decides to hold
accountable,
from the President and Vice-President through cabinet members and
other top officials.
It calls for a broad coalition that reaches far beyond progressives
to include conservatives committed to the rule of law and a broad
public concerned about the abuse of presidential power and the
preservation of democracy.
http://www.commondr
Sen. Joe Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
said it would be a "tragic mistake" if Bush chooses to increase
troops. But Biden, D-Del., said cutting off funds was not an option.
"As a practical matter there is no way to say this is going to
be stopped," Biden said regarding a troop increase, unless enough
congressional Republicans join Democrats in convincing Bush the
strategy is wrong.
Biden added that it probably would be an unconstitutional
violation of separation of powers if Democrats were to block Bush's
efforts as commander in chief after Congress had voted to authorize
going to war.
Comment: So UN-declare war on Iraq.
http://www.truthout
How the West will make a killing on Iraqi oil riches
January 7, 2007
Iraq's massive oil reserves, the third-largest in the world, are
about
to be thrown open for large-scale exploitation by Western oil
companies under
a controversial law which is expected to come before the Iraqi
parliament
within days.
http://news.
BACKGROUND & COMMENTARY by Mark Jensen: New Iraqi oil law reveals
much
[On Sunday, the London *Independent* confirmed what we have often
described on this web site, but which has been all but blacked out
of U.S. media:
that under the law that Iraq is being pressured to pass, "Iraq's oil
industry . . . will operate through 'production-
(or
PSAs) which are highly unusual in the Middle East."[1] -- The
*Independent* said it has seen "a draft" of the law, and reports for
the first time how the money from Iraqi oil is to be divided up. --
Under the
terms of the draft law, "oil companies [would be allowed] to take up
to
75 per cent of the profits . . . until they have recouped initial
drilling
costs. After that, they would collect about 20 per cent of all
profits
. . . twice the industry average for such deals," Danny Fortson
reported.
--
The U.S.-installed government of Iraq having privatized the
previously
nationalized oil industry, PSAs will allow supermajors "such as BP,
Shell, and Exxon" to take hundreds of billions of dollars in profits
from
Iraq. -- This is the principal reason that the U.S. national
security state
and the oil-fueled military-industrial
tolerate
the notion of leaving Iraq.
http://www.ufppc.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is
distributed without profit for research and educational purposes. MY
NEWSLETTER has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this
article nor is MY NEWSLETTER endorsed or sponsored by the
originator.)
http://groups.
my book, http://groups.
http://groups.
and http://groups.
No comments:
Post a Comment