'Fan My Brow !'
Jim Grichar (aka Exx-Gman)
Bush is really beginning to sweat, not only on his taxpayer-paid
safari to some of the hotter parts of Africa, but also because more
information is becoming public regarding his and his neocon advisers’
mendacity regarding the reasons for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. And
Bwana Bush’s faithful manservant, Tony Blair of England, is sweating
even more than his master, as the Labour Party is almost on the
verge of dumping him as Britain’s Prime Minister. It appears that
both need the political equivalent of the servants that were always
fanning some African king in the old Tarzan movies, that is, someone
or something to take the heat off of them.
Leaks and More Finger Pointing
Bush’s and his neocon advisers aka the Axis of Deceit seem to
have lost their ability to contain the usual amount of information
leaks that occur in Washington, DC, and this appears to have caused
them to break out into another sweat. Bush’s safari to and in Africa,
to promote the ghastly and wasteful 5-year, $15 billion, that the
U.S. is giving to fight AIDS on that continent, appears to be just
another attempt to divert the public’s attention from his real concerns,
namely that the public is increasingly demanding an accounting for
the lies told to justify the war on Iraq.
as the post-war Iraqi situation turns increasingly sour due to
the lack of finding any actual weapons of mass destruction, the
numerous terrorist attacks on U.S. troops stationed in Iraq, and
the $4 billion per month cost of running this failing operation,
DC’s info sleuths have stepped up the pace of their own hunt, asking
"What did the President know," and "When did he know
it?" They even suggest that he might have lied by deliberately
overstating the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in order
to gain domestic support for the U.S. attack.
most recent tussle between the press and the Bush Administration
has taken place over Bush’s January 2003 state of the union address,
in which he claimed that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from an
African nation, ostensibly to use in building nuclear weapons. At
a press briefing in Uganda, where Bush stopped during his lengthy
African trip, his National Security Adviser, Condoleeza Rice, stated
that the speech was vetted by the CIA and that Bush did not knowingly
state anything he knew to be false. Before and after the speech,
some U.S. intelligence officials reportedly expressed concern about
the validity of intelligence reports on possible Iraqi purchases
of uranium in Africa. Thus, Condoleeza Rice and the upper echelons
of the Bush Administration are blaming the CIA for not excluding
the information about possible Iraqi purchases of uranium from the
willing to take the blame, the CIA appears to have struck back.
In a separate article in the July
11 Washington Post, long-time national security and intelligence
reporter Walter Pincus (a reliable outlet for hot information that
senior intelligence and national security officials wish to leak)
reported that the CIA tried unsuccessfully last September to "...
persuade the British government to drop from an official intelligence
paper a reference to Iraqi attempts to buy uranium in Africa ...
." Bush used that British information, from the British intelligence
analysis of September 2002, in his state of the union address. According
to Pincus, "British officials have insisted that the Bush Administration
has never been provided with the intelligence that was the basis
for the charge included in London’s September intelligence dossier."
Furthermore, Pincus reported that a diplomatic source told him that
the British obtained their information on possible Iraqi purchases
of uranium from an unidentified third country. Pincus also learned
that the National Security Council issued guidance stating that
the U.S. has never received any such information from British intelligence.
even British intelligence is covering for the CIA, stating that
they never provided the raw intelligence report to Langley for analysis.
The real question then becomes this: if the U.S. only received the
finished British intelligence report, and if the CIA wanted the
information on possible Iraqi purchases of uranium removed from
the report, then why did anyone in the chain of command who should
have had access to the British report and CIA’s objections allow
that information to remain in Bush’s speech? Unsurprisingly, the
whole thing sounds rather fishy, doesn’t it?
leads to the troubles Her Brittanic Majesty’s government is having
in keeping secrets, despite having laws which really muzzle the
press (the Official Secrets Act, which can prevent leaks if enforced).
And Tony Blair has really broken out in a heavy sweat. According
to the London
Telegraph, "Tony Blair called a special Cabinet meeting
yesterday to plan ways of restoring the Government’s credibility
after Downing Street was forced to admit that no actual weapons
of mass destruction are likely to be found in Iraq. The three-hour
political session of the Cabinet was an indication of the alarm
within the Government over the damage being caused by the failure
to find deadly weapons in Iraq and the most sustained outbreak of
Labour dissent since Mr. Blair came to power."
to the Telegraph, "Downing Street embarked on a frantic damage
limitation exercise after the BBC (author’s note the British Broadcasting
Company) claimed that "sources at the top of Whitehall"
were saying that the Government no longer expected to find any weapons."
a Downing Street spokesman claimed that evidence of an Iraqi weapons
of mass destruction program existed. According to the Telegraph,
"It is understood that it could be chemicals used in the preparation
of WMD or plans for their construction." Even if true, that
is a big difference from actually having WMD ready to use, within
45 minutes notice, which was one of the main reasons given for attacking
Iraq. After all, it could turn out that the chemicals could have
intended for the manufacture of agricultural pesticides or herbicides.
the British seem less concerned about the U.S. stink over the false
report over Iraqi uranium purchases, Tony Blair has good reasons
to be sweating it out. Unless his spin doctors are able to quell
the budding rebellion among the ranks of Labour party Members of
Parliament, Tony could soon be history.
Americans seem to be almost comatose regarding the big lies and
dirty deeds done by Bush and his Axis of Deceit to justify and stage
the war on Iraq, nonetheless Bush and his political strategists
decided a trip to Africa might just take the public’s mind off of
the Iraq fiasco. But a Blair fall from power, with other nasty secrets
being revealed, might encourage other bureaucrats namely those
on this side of the Atlantic to start squealing to the press if
they know any more details of this horrible affair.
Bwana Bush’s troubles over Iraq increase further, both he and Blair
might find themselves booted out of office. And they would no longer
have minions cooling them off with the political equivalent of waving
Grichar (aka Exx-Gman) [send
him mail], formerly an economist with the federal government,
writes to "un-spin" the federal government's attempt to con the
teaches economics part-time at a community college and provides
economic consulting services to the private sector.
© 2003 LewRockwell.com