Info about subscribing or unsubscribing from this list is at the bottom of this 
message.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Palast for Conyers: The OTHER ' Memos' from Downing Street and
Pennsylvania Avenue

Wednesday, June 15, 2005
Greg Palast, unable to attend hearings in Washington Thursday, has
submitted the following testimony:

Chairman Conyers,

It's official: The Downing Street memos, a snooty New York Times "News
Analysis" informs us, "are not the Dead Sea Scrolls." You are warned,
Congressman, to ignore the clear evidence of official mendacity and
bald-faced fibbing by our two nations' leaders because the cry for
investigation came from the dark and dangerous world of "blogs" and
"opponents" of Mr. Blair and Mr. Bush.

On May 5, "blog" site Buzzflash.com carried my story, IMPEACHMENT TIME:
"FACTS WERE FIXED," bringing the London Times report of the Downing Street
memo to the US media which seemed to be suffering at the time from an
attack of NADD -- "news attention deficit disorder."

The memo, which contains the ill-making admission that "the intelligence
and facts were being fixed" to match the Iraq-crazed fantasies of our
President, is sufficient basis for a hearing toward impeachment of the
Chief Executive. But to that we must add the other evidence and secret
memos and documents still hidden from the American public.

Other foreign-based journalists could doubtless add more, including the
disclosure that the key inspector of Iraq's biological weapons, the late
Dr. David Kelly, found the Bush-Blair analysis of his intelligence was
indeed "fixed," as the Downing Street memo puts it, around the war-hawk
policy.

Here is a small timeline of confidential skullduggery dug up and broadcast
by my own team for BBC Television and Harper's on the secret plans to
seize Iraq's assets and oil.


February 2001 - Only one month after the first Bush-Cheney inauguration,
the State Department's Pam Quanrud organizes a secret confab in California
to make plans for the invasion of Iraq and removal of Saddam. US oil
industry advisor Falah Aljibury and others are asked to interview would-be
replacements for a new US-installed dictator.

On BBC Television's Newsnight, Aljibury himself explained,

"It is an invasion, but it will act like a coup. The original plan was to
liberate Iraq from the Saddamists and from the regime."


March 2001 - Vice-President Dick Cheney meets with oil company executives
and reviews oil field maps of Iraq. Cheney refuses to release the names of
those attending or their purpose. Harper's has since learned their plan
and purpose -- see below.


October/November 2001 - An easy military victory in Afghanistan emboldens
then-Dep. Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to convince the Administration
to junk the State Department "coup" plan in favor of an invasion and
occupation that could remake the economy of Iraq. An elaborate plan,
ultimately summarized in a 101-page document, scopes out the "sale of all
state enterprises" -- that is, most of the nation's assets, "? especially
in the oil and supporting industries."


2002 - Grover Norquist and other corporate lobbyists meet secretly with
Defense, State and Treasury officials to ensure the invasion plans for
Iraq include plans for protecting "property rights." The result was a
pre-invasion scheme to sell off Iraq's oil fields, banks, electric
systems, and even change the country's copyright laws to the benefit of
the lobbyists' clients. Occupation chief Paul Bremer would later order
these giveaways into Iraq law.


Fall 2002 - Philip Carroll, former CEO of Shell Oil USA, is brought in by
the Pentagon to plan the management of Iraq's oil fields. He works
directly with Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith. "There were plans," says
Carroll, "maybe even too many plans" -- but none disclosed to the public
nor even the US Congress.


January 2003 - Robert Ebel, former CIA oil analyst, is sent, BBC learns,
to London to meet with Fadhil Chalabi to plan terms for taking over Iraq's
oil.


March 2003 - What White House spokesman Ari Fleisher calls "Operations
Iraqi Liberation" (OIL) begins. (Invasion is re-christened "OIF" --
Operation Iraqi Freedom.)


March 2003 - Defense Department is told in confidence by US Energy
Information Administrator Guy Caruso that Iraq's fields are incapable of a
massive increase in output. Despite this intelligence, Dep. Secretary
Wolfowitz testifies to Congress that invasion will be a free ride. He
swears, "There's a lot of money to pay for this that doesn't have to be
U.S. taxpayer money. ?We're dealing with a country that can really finance
its own reconstruction and relatively soon," a deliberate fabrication
promoted by the Administration, an insider told BBC, as "part of the sales
pitch" for war.


May 2003 - General Jay Garner, appointed by Bush as viceroy over Iraq, is
fired by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. The general revealed in an
interview for BBC that he resisted White House plans to sell off Iraq's
oil and national assets.

"That's just one fight you don't want to take on," Garner told me. But
apparently, the White House wanted that fight.

The general also disclosed that these invade-and-grab plans were developed
long before the US asserted that Saddam still held WDM:

"All I can tell you is the plans were pretty elaborate; they didn't start
them in 2002, they were started in 2001."


November/December 2003 - Secrecy and misinformation continues even after
the invasion. The oil industry objects to the State Department plans for
Iraq's oil fields and drafts for the Administration a 323-page plan,
"Options for [the] Iraqi Oil Industry." Per the industry plan, the US
forces Iraq to create an OPEC-friendly state oil company that supports the
OPEC cartel's extortionate price for petroleum.


The Stone Wall

Harper's and BBC obtained the plans despite official denial of their
existence, then footdragging when confronted with the evidence of the
reports' existence.

Still today, the State and Defense Departments and White House continue to
stonewall our demands for the notes of the meetings between lobbyists, oil
industry consultants and key Administration officials that would reveal
the hidden economic motives for the war.

What are the secret interests behind this occupation? Who benefits? Who
met with whom? Why won't this Administration release these documents of
the economic blueprint for the war?

To date, the State and Defense Department responses to our reports are
risible, and their answers to our requests for documents run from evasive
to downright misleading. Maybe Congress, with it's power of subpoena, can
do better.


Blogs, the Media and Democracy

Let me conclude with a comment about those pesky "blogs" that so bother
the New York Times. We should stand and offer a moment of quiet gratitude
to the electronic swarm of gadfly commentators who make it so much harder
for the US media to ignore news not officially blessed. Yes, Judith
Miller's breathless reports for The Times that Saddam possessed weapons of
mass destruction may have maintained "access" for the mainstream press to
its diet of White House propaganda, but the blogs insure that, whatever
nonsense the US press is biting on, the public need not swallow.

_____________________________

Note: This message comes from the peace-justice-news e-mail mailing list of 
articles and commentaries about peace and social justice issues, activism, etc. 
 If you do not regularly receive mailings from this list or have received this 
message as a forward from someone else and would like to be added to the list, 
send a blank e-mail with the subject "subscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
or you can visit:
http://lists.enabled.com/mailman/listinfo/peace-justice-news  Go to that same 
web address to view the list's archives or to unsubscribe.

E-mail accounts that become full, inactive or out of order for more than a few 
days will be deleted from this list.

FAIR USE NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the 
information in this e-mail is distributed without profit to those who have 
expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational 
purposes.  I am making such material available in an effort to advance 
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, 
scientific, and social justice issues, etc. I believe this constitutes a 'fair 
use' of copyrighted material as provided for in the US Copyright Law.

Reply via email to