Keith Olbermann Show 2/7/2007: Richard Wolffe hit the nail on the head!

[AndyA]

On last night's Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Richard Wolffe was one of the guests discussing the Scooter Libby trial. During this segment, Wolffe made a comment that really hit home with me.

He said it was obvious that the Plame outing didn't just involve Scooter Libby's office, but also the offices of Cheney, Rove, Bush, etc. He commented that it kept the entire White House quite busy at the time dealing with it.

And then he said (paraphrasing, the transcript is not online yet):

"It's obvious from the testimony that virtually everyone at the White House, from the top down, was involved in this, and in fact spending most of their time on Plame/Wilson. It kind of makes you wonder how they could afford the time, what with fighting the war on terror and all."

This tells me that the "war on terror" we're fighting is only as important as the agenda set by the White House, which depends on whether they're in damage control mode, or expanding the Imperial pResidency mode.

Anyone else wonder if the war on terror is more Wag the Dog than anything else, designed solely to fuel the contracting and defense industries? No doubt Halliburton is preparing executive offices for Bush and Cheney even now, in thanks for the business tossed their way.

[Buzz Clik]

1. I don't see it that way.

The administration has been opportunistic to the extreme, but to accuse them of starting a war to enrich themselves is a bit much.

[redqueen]

2. That's a joke, right?

http://www.warisaracket.org/

[SammyWinstonJack]

3. You're kidding? right?

[Buzz Clik]

18. No.

Unless you're one of those tinfoil hat types who think that the U.S. was responsible for 9-11, I'm not sure how you can say that we started the war on terror for corporate profits. As I said, bastards like Cheney saw this as a dream come true, but that's as far as it goes.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

30. The "dream come true" being what?

A massive fortune, maybe? BushCo. saw a chance to topple a hostile government and enrich their principle supporters in the process. We would control Iraq's oil production and use the profits to "reimburse" Halliburton for the reconstruction -- reconstruction that was necessary because of our bombing campaign. You'd have to be more than a little deluded to think that this didn't enter into their thinking.

[Buzz Clik]

35. I don't disgree that profits were part of it...

... but I don't agree that profits were the primary motivation, at least not for Bush.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

37. Hard to disagree...

Bush is a lot like my cat. I look at her and wonder "Is the thinking anything at all?"

But with the Bush Team, profits are absolutely the motivating factor.

[Buzz Clik]

40. Agreed. 100%

[WinkyDink]

43. Then the motive was...what? Do you think DEMOCRACY, from a psycho who

hates the U.S. Constitution, and who gained office through blatant, brazen THEFT?!

[OwnedByFerrets]

32. There IS NO war on terror...........

unless you buy into the bull that this administration has been feeding you. The WAR they started for profit is the one in IRAQ!!

[Buzz Clik]

34. In Bush's mind, he's fighting a war on terror.

Not unlike tilting at windmills, but there you go.

I have no doubt that some of the evil bastards giving Bush advice -- combined with a lot of leftover weirdness with Bush41 -- got us into Iraq. Massive profits resulted, but saying that it was the primary motivation is pushing it.

[Orsino]

36. We'll never prove that.

It quacks like the cynical duck of corrupt hypocrisy, and given *'s history of lying about everything, we must doubt every belief he professes.

[Buzz Clik]

39. True, very true. I was giving him the benefit of doubt.

[Orsino]

41. You and most of the rest of us.

Thank heavens that years of experience with that has helped to wise us up.

[OwnedByFerrets]

48. Not that it helps a damn thing,

but I never gave him the benefit of a doubt.....and no one in Congress should have either. His past was indicative enough of his failures and incompetance. I dont consider myself a brilliant person, but I was smarter than most every politician in Washington. Whole lot of good it did me or anyone else.

[Garbo 2004]

50. Bush had no interest in terrorism: he didn't follow up on the USS Cole, blew off concern

about Bin Laden and AQ as a Clinton administration "obsession," ignored the Hart-Rudman report, and the PDB's relating to AQ, terrorism and potential attacks on the US interests at home and abroad.

On the other hand, Bush did have an interest in Iraq prior to 2000. In 1999 Bush spoke of Iraq and the potential benefits of an invasion if he got the opportunity, according to Bush's ghost writer for his autobiography: http://www.gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=761

Additionally: "When he was asked in a Republican presidential debate Dec. 3, 1999, in New Hampshire what he would do if Saddam Hussein were found to be building weapons of mass destruction, he had a blunt reply: 'I'll take 'em out.'" http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/030310/10bush.htm

Paul O'Neill, formerly Bush's Secty of the Treasury reported that from the beginning of the Bush Administration in early 2001, Bush was intent on "regime change" in Iraq. Not interested in combating terrorism (ask Richard Clarke) but on Iraq. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml

We still don't know all that went on in Cheney's energy task force meetings in Spring 2001, but after years of legal wrangling some documents were released:

"They included maps of Middle East and Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, two charts detailing various Iraqi oil and gas projects, and a March 2001 list of "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts," detailing the status of their efforts. The documents are available at www.judicialwatch.org."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2004/03/21/ING0H5LTDA1.DTL

[Swamp Rat]

49. "Unless you're one of those tinfoil hat types who think that the U.S. was responsible for 9-11"

Straw Man.

[AndyA]

4. I didn't say they started the war.

But I do believe it is possible that they took advantage of 9/11, in order to further their causes.

Their abuse of the system has been pretty bad since that point, and everything is based on the need to fight terrorism. Yet, they can find time to out CIA operatives engaged in fighting the war on terrorism.

Something doesn't add up.

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. But they DID start the war. Iraq had NOTHING to do with 911.

That's a point many people forget. They planned the illegal invasion of Iraq YEARS before they invaded. 911 was their 'excuse' to execute that plan.

[AndyA]

15. Yes, you are correct of course.

I guess I was thinking of it in terms of the war was started on 9/11 when the terrorists attacked. Of course Bush/Cheney started the war in Iraq, but I was referring to the "war on terrorism."

And, depending on how you look at it, they are responsible for 9/11 as well, since they ignored all the warnings and did nothing to prevent it. If their intent was to use it as a reason to go into Iraq, we have some of the most evil people to ever walk the face of Earth running our country right now.

[Buzz Clik]

22. Of course not.

The invasion of Iraq had been planned prior to Jan 2001. 9-11 gave them the excuse they wanted. My exception to the analysis was that the Iraq invasion happened only to enrich corporations, and I don't believe that.

[adigal]

I'll say it - they started a war, and Wolffe was right

He said that while BushCo used as an excuse all of their worries and busyness from fighting terror, it was obvious they were obsessed with what Matthews was saying about them. He asked when did they have time to fight terror??

[Marnieworld]

14. If they didn't start a war who did?

Seriously? No one else did. They made pre-emptive war policy. Of course starting wars in and of itself is a war crime according to the Geneva Conventions but laws are so old-fashioned nowadays.

[Buzz Clik]

21. Okay, we agree.

I misinterpreted this statement of yours:

Anyone else wonder if the war on terror is more Wag the Dog than anything else, designed solely to fuel the contracting and defense industries?

Wag the Dog was a concocted war. However, it that was not your intent, then we agree.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

7. Luv your'e

sense of humour.

[Buzz Clik]

23. I wasn't joking. Love your hyperbole.

[in_cog_ni_to]

9. What?! You don't believe Halliburton Cheny and Mr. failed oil company, didn't start this illegal

invasion to enrich themselves and their cronies? Hey man, I have a bridge for sale! This invasion has ALWAYS been about our oil being under Iraq's sand. Cheney's energy task force meetings divied up which oil company would get what and that was BEFORE the illegal invasion!

Jul 17, 2003 Contact: Press Office
202-646-5188





CHENEY ENERGY TASK FORCE DOCUMENTS FEATURE MAP OF IRAQI OILFIELDS

Commerce & State Department Reports to Task Force Detail Oilfield & Gas Projects, Contracts & Exploration

Saudi Arabian & UAE Oil Facilities Profiled As Well


(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and abuse, said today that documents turned over by the Commerce Department, under court order as a result of Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit concerning the activities of the Cheney Energy Task Force, contain a map of Iraqi oilfields, pipelines, refineries and terminals, as well as 2 charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts.” The documents, which are dated March 2001, are available on the Internet at: www.JudicialWatch.org.

The Saudi Arabian and United Arab Emirates (UAE) documents likewise feature a map of each country’s oilfields, pipelines, refineries and tanker terminals. There are supporting charts with details of the major oil and gas development projects in each country that provide information on the projects, costs, capacity, oil company and status or completion date.

Judicial Watch has been seeking these documents under FOIA since April 19, 2001. Judicial Watch was forced to file a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Judicial Watch Inc. v. Department of Energy, et al., Civil Action No. 01-0981) when the government failed to comply with the provisions of the FOIA law. U.S. District Court Judge Paul J. Friedman ordered the government to produce the documents on March 5, 2002.

The documents were produced in response to Judicial Watch’s on-going efforts to ensure transparency and accountability in government on behalf of the American people. Judicial Watch aggressively pursues those goals by making FOIA requests and seeking access to public information concerning government operations. When the government fails to abide by these “sunshine laws” Judicial Watch files lawsuits in order to obtain the requested information and to hold responsible government officials accountable.

“These documents show the importance of the Energy Task Force and why its operations should be open to the public,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Click here for for maps and charts of oilfields.


http://www.judicialwatch.org/printer_iraqi-oilfield-pr.shtml

Go to the link if you wish to see Cheneys maps and charts. They have a link there.

[nashville_brook]

27. here's the map

[Marnieworld]

12. Ok so it's just a giant coincedence

All of the official objectives of the Iraq war have been a complete and total failure yet the indirect benefits (all of the missing billions for Contractors, weapons manufacturers, mercenaries, base-building, taking the Iraq Oil off the market to benefit the Saudis, putting it back on the market to benefit US companies, Getting total Unitary Executive power and pushing through Patriot Act, surveilling US citizens phone calls, mail, and emails, establishing their own quasi-legal miltary judicial system- essentially transferring the treasury to their own pockets and becoming Kings etc.) have been a complete success for them. These were completely innocent unintended benefits all in the name of pursuing Democracy? Wow. That's some luck.

Obviously :sarcasm:

[xxqqqzme]

13. you forgot one of these

:sarcasm: or maybe more than one considering the topic :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

[Buzz Clik]

24. No, I didn't. You and I have different opinions. Nothing more.

[OwnedByFerrets]

16. You forgot your sarcasm emoticon.........nt

[oasis]

19. Cheney mouthpiece,Mary Matalin made a similar statement on the Imus Show this a.m.(nt)

[Buzz Clik]

25. Thanks for the uptake. God knows I'll never listen to Imus or Matalin.

[WinkyDink]

42. What?? You can say that, when TONS of cash is/are "missing"?!

It's a classic case of how the Mafia works: take over an enterprise (the U.S., Iraq); bleed its coffers dry; and then dump it (or, in the case of Iraq, keep selling it at a profit).
And destroy anyone---Gore, Kerry, Plame, Kelley---who gets in the way.

[godless]

47. You do realize, don't you, that you live in a world...

where you could be killed for your sneakers? When the motivation includes billions, if not trillions, of dollars, do any of us seriously believe that this country does not contain people who are ruthless enough to destroy thousands of lives in order to obtain that kind of wealth and power? 9-11 was the skeleton key to all of the Neo-Con's dreams, both foreign and domestic. I really can't believe anyone would question the complicity of the President and his gang of thugs in all this.

[blm]

5. They had to keep the story denied for 15 months before ELECTION DAY. Carville and Grunwald helped

do that for them, keeping quiet on what they knew about the WH's role in the outing, while Joe Wilson was smeared in the corporate media as a LIAR.

[screembloodymurder]

6. Terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy.

The war on terror is the new "cold war".

[originalpckelly]

8. Alright, the war on al-Qaeda.

[oasis]

10. This explains why Cheney's mouthpiece Mary Matalin was on the Imus Show this a.m. She was

doing her best trying to throw cold water on the importance of the Libby trial.

[Parche]

17. war on terra

They have to keep the CIA busy some how!!!! :sarcasm:

[Nite Owl]

20. I remember hearing that very

clearly last night too. My first thought though was when all this stuff came out we had to fight to be heard, to have the implications of the Plame affair even mentioned. Now they seem to be seeing the light but then we were left wing loonie conspiracy theorists. If they had taken this seriously we would be talking about President Kerry now.

(edited to correct wouldn't to would)

[AndyA]

26. I'm sure my quote is a loose interpretation of the original,

and I plan on going back to check the actual transcript when it goes online. The point Wolfe made was pretty clear in my mind, though. How could the White House, engaged in the all-consuming, all-important fight in the war on terror have time to dick around with something like this?

I mean, concocting a scheme to undermine someone's credibility by outing his wife, who just happened to be a CIA agent, because he spoke up and said the Bush Administration was wrong? I mean, really, this is a movie for cryin' out loud, not American government in action.

These people truly are little people, petty, simple minded, ignorant, and evil.

[Nite Owl]

31. It isn't just about her,

that would be bad enough, it goes deeper:

Compounding the damage, the front company, Brewster-Jennings & Associates, the name of which has been reported previously, apparently also was used by other CIA officers whose work now could be at risk, according to Vince Cannistraro, former CIA chief of counterterrorism operations and analysis. Now, Plame's career as a covert operations officer in the CIA's Directorate of Operations is over. Those she dealt with -- on business or not -- may be in danger. The directorate is conducting an extensive damage assessment. And Plame's exposure may make it harder for American spies to persuade foreigners to share important secrets with them, U.S. intelligence officials said.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brewster_Jennings_%26_Associates

This directly damaged our ability to gather information in antiterrorism.

[CatWoman]

28. AA

great minds, you know :)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x152143#152519

[AndyA]

45. Nothing gets past DU, does it?

:thumbsup:

I'm glad to know I wasn't the only one who felt that comment was significant.

[valerief]

29. 911 was lihop or mihop and it's definitely a wag the dog war. Anything

left in the war chest? If so, that dog will be wagging for some time.

[malaise]

33. I wouldn't call it wag the dog

but stuff the accounts.

[Poiuyt]

38. I believe Bush wanted to invade Iraq for personal political power

I base that on what he told his biographer in 1999:

“He was thinking about invading Iraq in 1999,” said author and journalist Mickey Herskowitz. “It was on his mind. He said to me: ‘One of the keys to being seen as a great leader is to be seen as a commander-in-chief.’ And he said, ‘My father had all this political capital built up when he drove the Iraqis out of Kuwait and he wasted it.’ He said, ‘If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency.”

http://www.gnn.tv/articles/article.php?id=761

"If I have a chance to invade..." He was chomping at the bit to invade Iraq!

[Beausoir]

44. Right to the very point.

I heard him last night and have been thinking about that comment all day.

He nailed it.

[Kurovski]

46. K&R.(nt)

[frogcycle]

51. sheesh!

"Anyone else wonder if the war on terror is more Wag the Dog than anything else..."

Why waste blogspace musing about the bleeding obvious?

OF COURSE IT IS!