Make your own free website on Tripod.com

Political news--December & January of 06 & 07

| Home | Iraq War comments by Michael Moore--satire | THE TROOP SURGE IS DOOMED | Gulf Stream headed south | Iraq Study Group Report--Palast | Getting out of Iraq--Rep. Kucinich | Bush as ususal, an horrific appointment | Kofi Annan, review | Federal spending on bio-terrorism
Iraq Study Group Report--Palast

IRAQ STUDY GROUP REPORT, PRO PRESIDENT’S POSITION PRETENDS TO OFFER REAL ALTERNTIVES.  The co-chairman’s reveal its bias.  Of importance is to not the Bush-Baker links to the Saudis and that the Saudi back the Sunni faction—thus we will stay the course, rather than permit a Shia ran government. 

 

Truth is no more important to a politician than an attorney, both are advocates

 

The Baker Boys: Stay Half the Course

Greg Palast, 12/8/8

Iraq Study Group or Saudi Protection League?
by Greg Palast

James Baker III and the seven dwarfs of the "Iraq Study Group" have come up with some simply brilliant recommendations. Not.

Baker's Two Big Ideas are:

1. Stay half the course. Keeping 140,000 troops in
Iraq is a disaster getting more disastrous. The Baker Boys' idea: cut the disaster in half -- leave 70,000 troops there.

But here's where dumb gets dumber: the Bakerites want to "embed"
US forces in Iraqi Army units. Question one, Mr. Baker: What Iraqi Army? This so-called "army" is a rough confederation of Shia death squads. We can tell our troops to get "embedded" with them, but the Americans won't get much sleep.

2. "Engage"
Iran. This is a good one. How can we get engaged when George Bush hasn't even asked them out for a date? What will induce the shy mullahs of Iran to accept our engagement proposal? Answer: The Bomb.

Let me explain. To get the Iranians to end their subsidizing the Mahdi Army and other Shia cut-throats, the Baker bunch suggest we let the permanent members of the UN Security Council -- plus,
Germany -- decide the issue of Iran's nukes. Attaching Germany is the signal. These signers of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) agree that Iran should be allowed a "peaceful" nuclear power program.

More... Now, I am absolutely wary of neo-con nuts who want to blow
Iran to Kingdom-come over its nuclear ambitions. But that doesn't mean we should kid ourselves. Iran has zero need of "peaceful" nuclear-generated electricity. It has the second-largest untapped reserve of natural gas on the planet, a clean, safe, cheap source of power. There's only one reason for a "nuclear" program, and it's not to light Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's bedside lamp.

Here's the problem with Baker's weird combo of embedding our boys with
Iraq's scary army while sucking up to the Iranians: it won't work. The mayhem will continue, with Americans in the middle, because the Baker brigade dares not mention two words: "Saudi" and "Arabia."

 

Saudi Arabia is the elephant in the room (camel in the tent?) that can't be acknowledged -- and the reason Baker is so desperately anxious to sell America on keeping half our soldiers in harm's way.  {I wouldn’t consider the 70,000 troops a serious recommendation—because it is impractical given current conditions, which have only been deteriorating.}

James III wants to seduce or bully
Iran into stopping their funding of the murderous Shia militias. But the Shias only shifted into mass killing mode in response to the murder spree by Sunni "insurgents."

Where do the Sunnis get their money for mayhem? According to a seething memo by the National Security Agency (
November 8, 2006), the Saudis control the, "public or private funding provided to the insurgents or death squads." Nice.

Baker wants us to bribe or blackmail
Iran into stopping one side in Iraq's uncivil war, the Shia. Yet we close our eyes to the Saudis acting as a piggy bank for the other side, the Sunni berserkers. (The House of Saud follows Wahabi Islam, a harsh, fundamentalist sect of Sunnism.)

Why is Baker, ordinarily such a tough guy, so coy with the Saudis? Baker Botts, the law firm he founded, became a wealthy powerhouse by representing
Saudi Arabia. But don't worry, the Iraq Study Group is balanced by Democrats including Vernon Jordan of the law firm of Akin, Gump which represents … Saudi royals.

Of course, the connections between Baker, the Bush Family and the Saudis go way beyond a few legal bills. (See, "The Best Little Legal Whorehouse in Texas" from my book Armed Madhouse.

Baker is more than aware that, two weeks ago, Dick Cheney dropped his Thanksgiving turkey to fly to
Riyadh at the demand of the Saudis for a dressing down by King Abdullah. The Saudis have made it clear that they will crank up their payments to warriors in Iraq to protect their Sunni brothers if America pulls out our troops.

King Abdullah's wish is Cheney's command -- and Baker's too. The Saudis want 70,000
US troops baby-sitting the Shia killers in Iraq's Army -- and so we will stay.

What gives King Abdullah the power to ghost-write the Iraq Study Group recommendations? It's not because the Saudis sell us broccoli.

And therein lies the danger. Behind the fratricidal fracas in
Iraq is something even more dangerous than bullets in Baghdad: a proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia to control Iraq's place in OPEC, the oil cartel. What is painted by Baker's Iraq Study Group as an ancient local clash between Shia and Sunni over the Kingdom of God, is, in fact, a remote control proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia over the Kingdom of Oil.

 

James Addison Baker III (born April 28, 1930), American statesman and diplomat, was Chief of Staff in President Ronald Reagan's first administration, United States Secretary of the Treasury from 1985 to 1988 in the second Reagan administration, and Secretary of State in the administration of President George H. W. Bush. He is also the founder of the James Baker Institute.

Baker served as chief legal adviser for George W. Bush during the 2000 election campaign and oversaw the Florida recount. He was instrumental in getting the Supreme Court to intervene in the Florida vote recount.  He is currently (as of 2004) a senior partner at the law firm of Baker Botts and senior counsel to the Carlyle Group.  {Both groups have received 10sk of millions from the Saudis} 

 

Lee Hamiltomn, the Democratic Party’s representative and co-chairman of the Iraq Report prospective is close to that of Baker’s, so close that Republicans appoint him when needed to appear bipartisian,  He was the vice chairman of the 9/11 Commision and currently serves on the President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council.  He was the Democratic represntative to the House from Indiana for 34 years, until 1999.  As chair of the Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran, Hamilton chose not to investigate President Ronald Reagan or President George H. W. Bush, stating that he did not think it would be "good for the country" to put the public through another impeachment trial.

 

What to expect of the future, is that the Saudis have enough clout with the Democrats that the U.S. will not allow a Shia dominated government.  We will stay the course in order to appease the Saudis--jk.

Huffington Post, at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-john-murtha/iraq-study-groups-policy_b_35774.html

 

Rep. John Murtha, 12/8/06

 

Iraq Study Group’s Policy no Different than the Current Policy

 

This is no surprise give that Jim Baker (a neocons/supply side economics believer) heads the group—jk

 

On November 7th, 2006 the American public sent a message on Iraq and as the new Democratic majority, we must respond with decisive action. Staying in Iraq is not an option politically, militarily or fiscally. The American people understand this. Today there is near consensus that there is no U.S. military solution and we must disengage our military from Iraq.

The Iraq Study Group recommended that we begin a withdrawal of U.S. troops by early 2008, depending on conditions on the ground. This is no different than the current policy. In my view, Iraq is plagued by a growing civil war and what is best for America's security needs and the future of our military is a responsible plan for redeployment.

 

Truth is no more important to a politician than an attorney, both are advocates