Print Page - 1984 Game Page and Essay Topics

peace and hotep,

1984 Game Page and Essay Topics

Here are some questions for you to try and answer; while there is no single right or wrong answer, these questions will help you to see how well you are able to use the ideas of the novel and apply them to the real world.

1. Take the current president of the United States and prove, first, that he is Big Brother. Now use ''doublethink" and prove that he isn't.

2. Think of instances in which our thinking is controlled. Are there groups and organizations that actively use mind control? How are they similar or different from "the Party"? If you were to assume that the Party is a singularly evil entity, would you say that this group is equally evil?

3. Prove that anything is true.

4. Are we already living, in part, in the world of 1984? If you think that we are not, why can the government exert the influence that it does? If you think that we are, why is the government allowing 1984 to still be published and read?

5. If you were George Orwell, would you be pleased or displeased with the world political scene?

6. How would you protect yourself against the Thought Police? Is there any defense? What can you do, personally, to prevent Ingsoc from becoming reality?

7. Is there any way to overthrow the Party? What would you do to stop their control? Would it work, or would it be futile?

8. You are a budding O'Brien type of person; what important career decisions would you make? What would you do with a friend like Winston?

9. Write your own essay in Newspeak. Note the differences in what you want to say and how it actually comes out. Does Newspeak destroy thought? Does it enable the government to control people? What types of Newspeak do we use today? Does it perform the same function? Does it affect the way we do things in society?

1984 : Notes
Cliffs Notes On--

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Borman, Gilbert.

Lincoln, Neb. Cliffs Notes, 1999.

ISBN: 0822008998
eBook ISBN: 0585137854
Subject: Orwell, George,--1903-1950.--Nineteen eighty-four--Study guides.

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

3. prove that anything is true.

okay, the world is flat.......
earth is the center of the universe........
2+2=5.......
africans are inferior......
kobey and oj are innocent......
the 'white'man owes us nothing .......
oil is not a fossil fuel.......

Humanity and Society in 1984

To demonstrate the effectiveness of Newspeak, this is a short essay on 1984. Then it is translated into Newspeak. This demonstrates the powerful ability of Ingsoc to eliminate thought; the entire gist of the original essay is destroyed. The student of 1984 should find this to be both amusing and frightening.

George Orwell's 1984 is a bitter attack against the evil modern plague of totalitarian oppression. Orwell expresses the idea that a government may enslave its people through controlling the media and enforcing its control through an extensive police network. His protagonist is an English middle-class thinker named Winston Smith. Winston is fascinated by the intellectual process of slavery. He works in the ministry which produces most of the lies for popular consumption; this ministry is ironically called Minitrue (a short form of Ministry of Truth). Winston rebels against his masters because he is aware of the evil of the system, and he is aware of the mass deception being perpetrated by the state. Winston starts off as a lonely man writing away in his illegal journal. He tries to tell us what his world is like. Orwell describes the tremendous ugliness of his world. Winston lives in a slum and can barely afford to live. His health is poor, and one gets the feeling that he wishes that he were dead. Orwell takes Winston on a rollercoaster ride of hope and disaster. Orwell raises our hopes by having Winston fall in love, and then he systematically crushes his rebellion and leaves him as less than a human being. This essay will deal with humanity and society and what happens when humanity and society are taken away from us.

Humanity is the quality of being a human being. This implies the normal range of emotions and thoughts as well as the process of living as a human being is presumed to live. Society is the aggregate whole of a larger group of people. Society is the means by which people organize themselves so that they may function and live efficiently. The world of 1984 is divided into three ''super states"; these states are permanently at war with each other. Winston lives in Oceania, which comprises most of what is now the United States and Great Britain. Winston lives a life of squalor; he is very lonely and his love life extends only to an occasional prostitute. The society of Oceania is split into three castes: a small group of brutal rulers, a larger group of middle-level functionaries, and a vast majority of mindless slaves; these are called respectively, the Inner Party, the Outer Party, and the Proles. The three groups are segregated, and status is based upon power. The Inner Party maintains its position through a police force which is bound by no laws. In Oceania, everything can be a crime. All opposition is punishable by death. Most societies have a set of rules that determine how we should behave; Oceania has only implied rules that may or may not be enforced on any given occasion. This situation affects Winston's humanity. Winston, who tries to maintain values similar to our own, is deprived of his humanity. He is dying of disease and malnutrition. To attempt to regain his lost humanity, he rebels; he begins writing his diary and tries to contact the mystical Brotherhood so that he might join a different society. The Brotherhood is led by the nonexistent Emmanuel Goldstein, just as the Party of Oceania is led by Big Brother. The entire society, however, is structured around lies. Winston has the very important job of altering the past and covering up the lies of the Party. Oceania will not even tell the truth about when or whom they have been at war with in the past. Thus the Party claims: we are at war with Eastasia. In truth, they have been at war with Eurasia, and Eastasia is their ally.

Winston's rebellion is discovered at its inception, and he is watched by the police until they decide to destroy him. The man whom Winston believed was his ally and friend was actually his greatest enemy. In the society of lies, he had fallen for a lie, and his punishment was his total destruction. O'Brien, Winston's betrayer, takes personal charge of Winston's destruction. One of the most important aspects of our humanity is the need for companionship and love. Winston tries to maintain his loyalty to his lover and coconspirator; in essence, he fights for his humanity. He loses, and he is turned into something less than human.

Orwell takes the thesis that society can destroy our humanity, and in a sick, warped society, this becomes the raison d'être of the state. By the end of 1984, Winston is pointed in front of a mirror and shown the ravages of his destruction. He is told that he is dead as a man. This last message demonstrates that his status is as a nonhuman being, one who is only physically alive. The objective of Oceania is a homogeneous society of dead creatures who will obediently serve without question or thought.

1984 is a depressing story, but its impact is tremendous. It is a warning to us to preserve our humanity and to make sure that we live in a sane society. We must not let happen to us what happens to Winston Smith.

This is the same essay translated into Newspeak. In order to be truly proper Newspeak, the entire aspect of the essay has to be altered to be ''goodthink." [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

freedomisahapislave

I think it's pretty safe to assume that anything that comes from corporate media outlets, which is more than 90% of everything, is bogus.

So the 'opposition' from the democrats in this U.S. 'election' is just smoke and mirrors. They are corporate shills as much as the Republicans, and their little squabbles are meant to distract people from real issues, rather than shed any light on reality. I wish Americans didn't have such a short memory, but that is what the corporate media promotes.

In retrospect for example we can see that France's 'opposition' to the war on Iraq in the end made it possible for the U.S. to attack without going for a U.N. vote.

They 'manufacture consent', and they play to people's most selfish impulses and to their fears.

There are so many examples of the media deflecting people from the questions they really ought to be asking. We're in the midst of a massive global corporate takeover.

There are many sites on the internet at this point that are exposing the truth about many things, but they exist side by side with ones that do just the opposite. As I said, it takes discernment, and some knowledge of history, to separate the fact from the fiction. And real history is the LAST thing being taught in most U.S. schools, take it from me. We have a huge MISEDUCATION effort going on here, which has so far been highly successful.

I think that looking at the history of the CIA and the rise of the global fascist network after World War II is crucial info. We see the same names popping up again and again. Trinicenter has articles by a guy named Blum. He is good. As are Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn.

Look at the relationship between the Bush and bin Laden families, and you get a taste of the deception being perpetrated by the media.

Rootsie

Peace.

Wonderful reasoning here.

I think this does well as the CLINCHER to find the ROOT of our enslavement, posted by Ras_Tyehimba:

http://www.africaspeaks.com/reasoning/?board=rb;action=display;num=1062049100

"Evil?What a lot of people call evil is really a person's inclination to follow their lower self/animal self(chakras 1-3). Feelings, emotions and passions are good servants but poor masters. This point is emphasized in the battle between Seth and Heru in the Kemetic mythological story.

What separates man from 'animal' is his ability to reason and discern truth from falsehood. 'Mankind' is conscious in that he.she can think about what they are thinking, animals can't do this. So my whole perception of evil is different; InI don't believe in any person with any forked tail and horns(often depicted as being black). We have the potential to be gods (directly) and reflect the Supreme power using our higher faculties or we can be like animals and be satisfied with mere carnal gratification. that is, eat and have sex .

Even if one seeks to reach that infinite plane of all possibilities the lower self still has to be fulfilled for the balance to be maintained. So it's just complementary forces at work, not 'good', and 'evil', in a strict sense of the word.

When man/wombman maintain this balance inkeeping with natural law, all things are possible. The ancients understood this perfectly. The philosophy of Maat (truth, justice, BALANCE and righteousness) is the philosophy of the ancient rastaman.

The aim of this existence is to tap directly and permanantly into the source of all consciousness,(Negust negast/Neter Neteru) and becomeintegrated into the Godhead (become one with Jah)

The rastaman is this time is often removed from from his natural surrounding that he had in ancient times due to various circumstance. Irregardless of this, the rasta in this time must learn to fly again, as they did thousands of years in alkebu lan. Our ancestors in Alkebulan(Kemet/Ithiopia/West Africa etc) were able to do great mind boggling things because they were flying, they were tapping into the source of all consciousness. We must once more traverse this universe and spread the message of life which is love, universal love. Universal meaning 'of one truth'. And love can only exist on the foundation of truth. Only truth can truly empower one. There are varying degrees of truth, so the rastafarian must climb this ladder of truth and wisdom and reach the ultimate truth.
the price of failure to one higher up on the ladder than others will be higher; to whom much is given much is expected.

Truth can only emanate from self discovery, and in discovering ourselves we will realize that we are the universe (all the elements that make up the universe are inside us). Thus in loving ourselves we will love the universe in all its diverse glory. Love Love Love

One can't access truth and love through the medium popular culture. Popular culture is one of death and destruction. "Destruction walks with smiling faces" said the revolutionary Peter Tosh. And he knew what he was saying; the capitalist sitstem plays tricks with our mind, they bombard us with things that look good, smell good, taste good, feel good, sound good but in reality the essence of it is filthy, utterly corrupt. Our senses perpetuate the illusion. So its the senses that can trap one and fill one's mind with garbage and illusion, encouraging a life void of truth and purpose. Get rich, get money, get clothes, get bling bling, get fancy cars, get lots women preferably white women.........and so they go, caught up in the glittery conglomeration of distraction.. They tout these carnal pursuits as the main purpose of education."

Peace and greetings all!

Good reasoning going. I would like to add some comments.

Thanks, seshatasefekht, for bringing up the topic of 1984.

I read the book 10 years ago, and have since realized how close we have come to the society it describes. Newspeak is everywhere: in the language of liberal economics (think of all the euphemisms for "firing workers", like "downsizing"), politics ("humanitarian intervention") etc. Another thing Orwell described is the switching of enemies, and the subsequent denial that they were ever at war with that country (think of US and bin Laden, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq.....)

Thanks, Rootsie, for insights on corporate media. I have read Chomsky and respect him very much.

It is certainly difficult at times to sift wheat from chaff, but the truth is out there somewhere in the information jungle. It has a tendency to reach through to conscious people, much the same way as in popular music, where we can discern the Lauryn Hill's from the Beyonce's. It's all there for those willing to listen.......

A good idea to decide on whether to trust a source of information, is to look into whose interests it represents. If it's big capital or government, good reason to be suspicious.
Independent activists on the side of ordinary people usually have credibility.

In the current global predicament, the truth is usually worse than fiction, if that's a rule of thumb.....

Respect,

Tian

peace and hotep,

"5. If you were George Orwell, would you be pleased or displeased with the world political scene? "

if i was george or-well and alive today after publishing 1984 in the late forties against wishes of the same military industrial complex later revealed/disclosed by eisenhowie, i would suspect that the world had become utopia instead of dystopia and that my longevity was was the result of the benefit a true socialized healthcare and self love incumbent of a place that use to be noplace(thomas moore's utopia).

however, if george orwell was taken from a time machine which had propelled him here to 2003 a day after the first publication of 1984, he would not say i told you so. he would not explain how jack london foresaw an iron heel or how zamyatin checked what we would become or that aldous huxley proclaimed a brave new world or that ray bradbury knew the temperature at which books burned(451').

george orwell would be so displeased with the world political scene that he would only offer this forsaken world of big brother the solution to the problem of 1984 and if that solution was allowed to take 'roots' perhaps it would not take the 400 or more years to eradicate the police state of human affairs foresaw by london or the 'lynch letter'.

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

kebo, i use to think/believe that credible independent activists were usually on the side of ordinary people until i got a dose of the deptofjustice's "weed and seed" program. to me it is just as bad as cointelpro. wholesale sellout. community based programs did it for the love of money. soon the world of Big Brother will make sense to us.

the most dangerous independent activists(free radicals) are problem solvers. if they were not activist, they would be our finest scientists. refining information, seemingly, from thin air.

in the world of 1984, it has been proven that history is cyclical and by controlling the past --- big brother controls the present and the future.

"why would the system even keep documentation of corrput sh*t that goes on? "

why would an outer party member, winston, be employed by the
ministry of information for the purpose of reclassifying people as-----non persons. they are thought criminals, not me. he says.

"and why wouldn't they see to it that all records of corrupt activity are destroyed."

in 1984, the records of corrupt activity is 'bait' for potential thought crime. to a police state such records are invaluable
for perpectuating thoughtcrime.

truth/freedom is the freedom to say that 2 plus 2 equals 4.

starving and stolen children are being raised by big brother and like winston their eternal allegiance will be withe the hand that feed them. i was once told in a court of law that i bit the hand that fed me. what a relief........ because by biting that hand, the information/Truth get to the hands of independent activists/reporters/social commentators who then pass it on?

http://www.consortiumnews.com/newbook.html [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]http://www.randomhouse.com/features/bamford/home.html [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

freedomisahapislave

Greetings,

Kebo, you asked where activists get their information.

Many activist do their own research among people who have direct access to information, either because the system is leaking, or because they are negatively affected by that system.

Even in "1984", the system is not watertight. The proletariat, kept in ignorance, are still "free" in the sense that they are not under direct surveillance. The problem is that they suffer from false consciousness. If I remember correctly, Winston went do their areas (the "ghetto") to try to find out about things, but very few could remember the past or cared to do so......

In our real world, the system cannot completely stop the truth, they just outnumber the true information with propaganda. If we look closely, and search other sources than the mainstream, we can still find the truth. This is actually what Rootsie said earlier.

For instance, I think that censorship is harder in the USA than in Europe. A couple of weeks ago, the Norwegian national broadcasting showed a French docu about the CIA's atrocities. I doubt that national TV in America would show this one.....
While it was showing, the sound disappeared. It later came back, but I guess many viewers had already changed the channel. I never heard any explanation, it might be sabotage by the CIA (who has all electronic transmissions under surveillance anyway) or someone loyal to the USA in the TV studio.

Seshata, I can see your point about the danger of certain independent activists. I think we need to watch out for what you are saying there.

Actually, thought crime is being introduced in our new anti-terror laws, where people can be convicted for their intentions.

Still, I think there are better chances of fighting the system in the real world than in "1984". "1984" is still a warning to us about the worst case scenario.

WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THE SYSTEM IS NOT ALL-POWERFUL, IT CAN BE BEATEN!

Let's fight until the Babylon system is down and destroyed! People are fighting against imperialism all over the world now, there is hope that we can win!

The struggle continues!

Tian

Greetings, Kebo

That is an interesting and important question you are raising. I'll try to share my position on this.

I believe no human being, or man-made system for that sake, has a "lock on the game", simply because it is NOT a game, we are talking about the real world. The only one powerful enough to determine the outcome of history, would be GOD. And I believe that even God has not determined the world, prophecies are warnings to us. (Sorry, this was besides the point - I don't want to discuss beliefs/religion here)

The best argument that there is hope, is HISTORY. We need to study history and learn from it.

History teaches us that NO EMPIRE HAS EVER SURVIVED!!!

Limiting the discussion to the last century, what happened to the Ottomans, Germans, Japanese, British and Soviet empires, to name but a few? They all collapsed!

I seriously believe, supported by many critical thinkers around the world, that the AMERICAN EMPIRE WILL FALL WITHIN OUR LIFETIME!

I think George Bush knows (or fears) this as well, and that explains why he is so desperate. But his desperation and impatience will most likely lead to IMPERIAL OVERSTRETCH, something that brought down many empires in history. I predict that the US will not be able to bear the costs (economic, human and political) of continuing the "war on terror" for decades. Keep in mind that for every new war, America will lose support and recruit more terrorists.

Looking back to 1984, maybe we Westerners, either we live in Norway or the US, are the ones in the "outer party", the ones under surveillance, the ones that lose hope? Perhaps we are the deceived ones.

If we look to the Third World, where there is less access to misinformation, and more access to direct experience and suffering, it's obvious that the system has NOT got every angle covered. If enough people join the anti-imperialist fight, the imperialists will have no chance!!!

It is a question of time, but time is on our side! And there is always the danger of a new empire replacing the American one. Some have suggested China......

I hope we can continue reasoning this issue further, as it's very important, I think....

Tian

peace and hotep,

with the advent of the machine, man's production of goods increased tremendously. utopia was set aside by the capitalist and dystopia continued along with the theft of human production of surplus goods. instead of sharing this surplus with the working class, the capitalist enabled themselves by absorbing the excess capital created by mass production of workers. why is it harder for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven than a camel to enter the eye of a needle? within the capitalistic system the capitalist steal from petit capitalists as well as the common worker.

Tian, if the infrastructure of the system breaks down and if we successfully inhibit the people with power from just leaving the sinking ship and jump on the next one, we must not destroy the machine or become machine breakers. the capitalist welcome an attempted violent overthrow of their decadent system which would allow them to continue jumping from ship to ship..... the only way to prevent them from escaping and setting up elsewhere is to legally and gradually take their ships since we could never compete with pschopaths with their choice of their own weapons of mass destructions. is it better to be an enemy at the gates or within them? trojan horse theory.

like iyah360 said, the beast is private, secret, economic entities that can play nation-states off of one another and all laws are being erased which allow the nation state to protect itself.

it would seem difficult for westerners, in general, to make up the ones in the "outer party" because in the world of 1984 the world is divided and controlled by three superstates and each one consists of inner(5%), outer(10%) and proletariat(85%). the ones under surveillance are basically the outer party members who are tried and tested for membership into the inner party. they eventually end up in room 101. they are the one who must be strip of hopes or other loyalties. also, within the three superstates the inner party is at war with all of the states' inhabitants for the sole purpose of maintaining its hieratical/pyramidal structure where the few(eye) rule over the many(body).

the only hope remains with the proles latent consciousness.

Tian, if we look to the third world(please consider the proles as the third world collectively), where there is less access to misinformation, and more access to direct experience and suffering, it's obvious that the system has NOT got every angle covered. true. however if people fight the capitalist using its self defeating methods, we will have no chance!!!

if the american empire fall, you can be assured that big brother has a long awaited contigency plan. the empire must be carefully transformed in our life time or over the next century.

Tian, i think george bush knows nothing and fears everything but his masters pressume to know everything and fears nothing. if we have considered IMPERIAL OVERSTRETCH, remember big brother has also studied the cycles of history. the inner party will be able to bear the costs (economic, human and political) of continuing the "war on terror" for hundreds of years until a 'free radical' appears. Keep in mind that the purpose of war is the destruction of surplus goods instead of sharing them with the working class.

History teaches us that NO EMPIRE HAS EVER SURVIVED until the age of big brother (which is only a progression of dystopia that ends with zamyatin's "we"). mankind's inhumanity to mankind lead to his displacement with machines.

if we fight until the Babylon system is down and destroyed then we bow to the sethian gods of war and lose.

how was the battle between horus/hero/hera and seth/typhoon ended? in court not on a battlefield.....our hope is with maat which is the one angle that the system could not cover.

to hell withe sedition. [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

freedomisahapislave

peace and hotep,

firstly, tian,

"6. How would you protect yourself against the Thought Police? Is there any defense? What can you do, personally, to prevent Ingsoc from becoming reality? "

isn't this the appropriate question?

for years i have advocated the development of an independent african in amorica congress. consisting of the combined leadership of every progressive organization at our disposal. instead of having a few sacrificial leaders, we should be represented by a body of self replenishing leadership forming an oaau(or african unity) in amorica which should present one clear thought on relevent issues. a real 'black' caucus. one people. one aim. one love.

i hope this clarify just what we should do. yes we should work within the system to better it rather than take over control through revolt. reformation over revolution or we will throw out the baby with the bathwater. if we africans had no blame, i would choose revolution. however i know different. we produced 'white'ness.

tian, "if people fight the capitalist using its self-defeating methods, we will have no chance", because self defeating method/tactics shown historically to fail. we cannot fight a perceived enemy by using its own tactics. we will never defeat a psychopath without becoming the same. we cannot utilize ignorance, arrogance and stubborness.

to prevent Ingsoc from becoming reality we must raise an organization of rational and respected voices, unlike my own, to develop our own declaration of independence from all would be tyrants. our combined organizational leadership should convene regularly and publicly on general issues if only by internet alone. then it would really matter if we collectively opposed or promoted anything.
[smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]
freedomisahapislave

peace and hotep,

freedum = slavery

war = peace

ignorance = strenght

9. Write your own essay in Newspeak. Note the differences in what you want to say and how it actually comes out. Does Newspeak destroy thought? Does it enable the government to control people? What types of Newspeak do we use today? Does it perform the same function? Does it affect the way we do things in society?

"Timeline of Saddam Hussein's rise and fall from power
A glance at the life of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein:
April 28, 1937: Saddam Hussein is born in Tikrit to peasants of the Sunni Muslim minority in Iraq. Abandoned by his mother, he is raised for a time by his Muslim uncle.

1955-57: Saddam attends nationalist school in Baghdad, joins the Baath Socialist Party and takes part in a coup attempt on the king and prime minister.

1958: Saddam spends six months in prison for slaying his communist brother-in-law.

1959: After taking part in an assassination attempt on the prime minister, Saddam escapes to Syria with an injured leg. He later travels to Egypt under the protection of Egyptian President Gamel Abdel Nasser.

1962: Saddam enters the University of Cairo; the following year, the Baath Party overthrows Iraq's prime minister, paving the way for Saddam to return to Iraq and marry his first cousin, Sajida Khairallah Tulfah.

1964-66: The Iraq government imprisons Saddam for plotting against it. He escapes.

1968: A leader in the Revolutionary Command Council, Saddam plays a major role in the Baath Party's coup.

July 16, 1979: Saddam becomes the head of state, chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, prime minister, commander of the armed forces and secretary-general of the Baath Party. By August, he orders the execution of about 500 senior members of the government.

1980: Iraq goes to war with Iran. Saddam uses mustard gas on the Iranian people in 1984.

1988: Saddam orders the use of mustard gas and nerve agents to kill at least 5,000 civilians in the Kurdish region of Iraq; Iran and Iraq declare a cease-fire.

Aug. 2, 1990: Iraq invades Kuwait.

Jan. 17, 1991: U.S.-led coalition begins 37-day bombing portion of Gulf War.

Feb. 24, 1991: Operation Desert Storm ground war begins, lasts 100 hours and chases Iraqi troops from Kuwait.

1991: Shiite rebellion and Kurdish uprising erupt in Iraq. Saddam brutally crushes both, killing thousands.

1996: Saddam orders the execution of two sons-in-law for defecting to Jordan after luring them back to Iraq with a false pardon.

1997: Saddam repeatedly denies attempts by United Nations weapons inspectors to resume inspections.

2000: Saddam, worth $7 billion, ranks 55th on the Forbes richest list. The U.S. calls for a special war crimes tribunal to try Saddam.

2002-03: Iraq allows weapons inspectors back into Iraq amid pressure by the U.N. and U.S. war threats. U.S. officials continue to assert that Saddam is hiding weapons of mass destruction.

March 17, 2003: President Bush tells Saddam to leave Iraq within 48 hours or be ousted by military force; the ultimatum comes after a failed attempt to get the U.N. Security Council to agree on a course of action to disarm Iraq.

March 18: Saddam appears on Iraqi television and defies Bush's ultimatum.

March 19: War begins with an airstrike on a compound where Saddam is believed to be meeting with advisers in Baghdad; he later appears on Iraqi television.

March 20: 40 Tomahawk missiles are fired on Dora Farms, south of Baghdad, where Saddam and sons are said to be. Later in the day, Saddam appears on Iraqi TV.

April 4: Iraqi TV shows video of Saddam walking on a Baghdad street.

April 7: U.S. warplanes bomb a section of the Mansour district in Baghdad where Saddam and sons were said to be meeting.

April 9: Baghdad falls.

April 18: Audio and video recordings of Saddam surface, purportedly made April 9.

July 4: CIA says an al-Jazeera TV audiotape of Saddam saying he is still in Iraq and directing attacks is "most likely his (Saddam's) voice."

July 17: Arab TV airs audiotape purportedly of Saddam denouncing Iraq's newly formed Governing Council.

July 22: Saddam's sons and top lieutenants, Uday and Qusay, are killed in a firefight with U.S. troops. Shortly after the raid, U.S. troops mount another in Mosul, saying "we missed him by a matter of hours."

July 27, predawn: U.S. troops raid three farms in Tikrit, again announcing they missed Saddam by 24 hours.

Evening: Although not confirmed, witnesses report soldiers raided the home of a tribal leader in Baghdad, looking for Saddam.

July 29: Iraqi TV airs audiotape of Saddam acknowledging his sons' deaths; CIA says it is authentic.

Aug. 1: Another audiotape issues a new call to arms against U.S. forces; CIA authenticates it as Saddam.

Dec. 13, 8:30 p.m. local time: U.S. forces capture Saddam on a farm in Ad Dwar. He was hiding in a 6-foot by 8-foot hole that had been camouflaged with bricks and dirt.

Sources: Associated Press and USA TODAY research" according to big brother's newspeak

thoughtcrime does not entail death
thoughtcrime is death..........

oceania is at war withe east asia
oceania has always been at war withe east asia
oceania has never been at war withe eurasia

under the spreading chestnut tree
i saw you and
you saw me...... [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

next.

freedomisahapislave

peace and hotep,

some people today wanted to know why saddam wasn't taken care of back then. was it because of noriega? [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

Houston Chronicle

NOVEMBER 6, 1993

Column: Editorials

UNRELIABLE SOURCES
CIA has knack of employing most ruthless autocrats

By Staff

Edition: 2 STAR
Section: A NEWS
Page: 36

Index Terms:
Editorial Opinion

Estimated printed pages: 2

Article Text:

The Central Intelligence Agency cannot conduct its worldwide spying operations without coming into contact with unsavory people. However, as the events in Haiti remind Americans, the CIA has an uncanny knack for fostering and enriching some of the worst autocrats, drug traffickers and murderers of our time.

Following the circulation of a fake CIA report alleging that ousted Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was mentally ill, U.S. officials revealed that during the 1980s the CIA employed some of the principal military officers and politicians who overthrew Aristide and are now making Haiti such a hell on earth. Congress' General Accounting Office reports that Haiti's strongman, Gen. Raoul Cedras, and Police Chief Michel Francois are key suspects in the smuggling of tons of cocaine from Colomb ia to the United States via Haiti.

The CIA's involvement in Haiti is reminiscent of its operations in Panama, where it recruited, paid and nourished Gen. Manuel Noriega. Noriega is now imprisoned in the United States after the U.S. invasion of Panama and his conviction on drug charges. Like his Haitian counterparts, Noriega may have been a valued information source for the CIA, but the information he provided could not possibly have compensated for the injuries he gave to democracy and human rights.

The CIA says it needs to employ dictators and cutthroats such as members of the repressive Haitian military in order to keep U.S. officials fully informed of political developments. Why is it, then, that U.S. officials and the agency seem constantly taken by surprise by the actions of the thugs they employ? If the CIA still needs to know about political reality in Haiti, perhaps it could turn to a number of excellent books on the subject in the library, or consult the news pages of a good daily newspaper.

Copyright 1993 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: 11*06*1164088

freedomisahapislave

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

October 14, 2001

Houston Chronicle 100 YEARS 1981-90

Author: Staff

Edition: 2 STAR
Section: SPECIAL
Page: 14

Index Terms:
Profile
Houston Chronicle Events History

Estimated printed pages: 1

Article Text:

Reagan inaugurated as hostages freed in Iran, 1981.

U.S. Centers for Disease Control announces first cases of AIDS, 1981.

Prince Charles marries Lady Diana Frances Spencer, 1981.

President Reagan wounded by John Hinckley in Washington, D.C., along with press secretary James Brady, 1981.

War in the Falkland Islands breaks out between Argentina and Great Britain; British launch massive effort to liberate the islands, Argentine defenders surrender, 1982.

Chinese and British agree to restore Hong Kong to China in 1997, 1984.

Mikhail Gorbachev becomes general secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, 1985.

Space shuttle Challenger explodes 74 seconds after launch at Cape Canaveral, killing seven astronauts, 1986.

Dow Jones average drops 508 points, Oct. 19, 1987.

Pam Am Flight 103, bound from London to New York, blown up, killing 258, Dec. 21, 1987.

U.S. invades Panama, ousts Manuel Noriega, 1989.

Tiananmen Square Revolt in People's Republic of China, 1989.

President George H.W. Bush nominates General Colin Powell as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the first black to attain that rank, 1989.

Caption:
Photo: 241 U.S. Marines and 58 French killed as terrorists bomb U.S. installation and French barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, 1983 (color)

Copyright 2001 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: 3345152

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

NOVEMBER 28, 1992

Panamanian official may have unfrozen $1 million for cartel

Author: TOD ROBBERSON
Washington Post

Edition: 2 STAR
Section: A NEWS
Page: 26
Dateline: PANAMA CITY

Estimated printed pages: 2

Article Text:

PANAMA CITY -- Panama's top law enforcement officer, Attorney General Rogelio Cruz Rios, may have assisted a Colombian cocaine cartel by releasing more than $1 million frozen in the cartel's bank accounts here, according to U.S. and Panamanian officials.

The officials said Cruz unfroze bank accounts that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration believes were used in a money-laundering operation by the Cali cartel, Colombia's second-largest cocaine-trafficking syndicate.

According to a subsequent ruling by the Panamanian Supreme Court, Cruz did not have the authority to take such action.

U.S. officials acknowledged that Cruz's action has, at the very least, set back efforts to curtail Colombian drug operations here.

The United States invaded Panama and installed a pro-American government in 1989 with the express purpose of eradicating this country's high-level cooperation with Colombian drug traffickers.

The Bush administration claimed a major victory in the international war on drugs when U.S. troops captured dictator Manuel Noriega, who is now serving a 40-year prison term in Florida for drug trafficking.

In an interview, Cruz said that he had unfrozen the bank accounts but said he was strictly adhering to Panamanian law -- which, he said, prohibited the assets from being frozen.

He maintained that the charges were being made against him for political reasons, adding that he had informed the U.S. Embassy before taking the measure.

He added that he believed he would have the authority to unfreeze other accounts in the future.

Even before the invasion, the Bush administration had concerns about possible links between Cruz and the Cali cartel, according to U.S. and Panamanian officials.

Nevertheless, the administration kept silent when President Guillermo Endara named him attorney general shortly after Endara took the oath of office at a U.S. military base in late 1989. According to Panamanian law, Endara cannot now dismiss Cruz.

Cruz served as secretary of the board of directors of First Interamericas Bank, S.A. -- a bank allegedly owned by the cartel -- from November 1984 until July 1985, according to documents obtained from the public registry here.

The Panamanian government dissolved the bank in mid-1985 after determining that it had been used for cartel money-laundering operations.

Cruz said that he resigned from the bank upon learning that fellow board members were Cali cartel members. The bank was dissolved days after his resignation.

According to documents provided by government investigators, Cruz over the past 2 1/2 years has unfrozen more than $1 million in Panamanian bank accounts -- despite having been told by the DEA that the accounts were owned by the Cali cartel and managed by at least one of his former colleagues on the board of First Interamericas.

Copyright 1992 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: 11*28*1096152

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

February 14, 1988

Column: OUTLOOK

Will the real George Bush stand up?

Author: MARIANNE MEANS

Edition: 2 STAR
Section: OUTLOOK
Page: 1

Index Terms:
EDITORIAL OPINION
'CLT 'CLT ELECTIONS PRESIDENTIAL

Estimated printed pages: 3

Correction: Ms. Means, based in Washington, D.C., is a columnist for Hearst Newspapers.

Article Text:

I F HIS PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDACY is to survive, the real George Bush will have to stand up.

Assuming, of course, there "is" a real George Bush.

Iowa Republicans resoundingly rejected the vice president in large measure because they are confused about the identity of the man behind the big title. Bush has tried to run simultaneously both as President Reagan's loyal shadow and as an independent leader, two patently contradictory roles.

Bush did poorly in Iowa with those Republicans who think it is time for fundamental changes in Reagan's policies; they felt Bush's intimate association with the president was a liability. Yet he only got a fourth of those GOP voters who said they were supporters of Ronald Reagan.

Iowans were right to wonder just who George Bush is. He has yet to propose a political agenda of his own that might establish ways in which he differs from the president. He has not separated himself from Reagan on a single major issue. Yet nobody confuses his personality with that of Reagan.

Bush made a pitiful effort in New Hampshire to get a new start by claiming geographical affinity, echoing Sen. Robert Dole's successful Iowa message - he's "one of us." Bush cited the fact he was born in neighboring Massachusetts, grew up in Connecticut and summers in Maine. But the Bush imitation was as superficial as the original was powerful.

Dole's appeal was only marginally aimed at reminding Iowans of his roots next door in Kansas. Its principal message involved character: Dole was saying that he grew up poor, has worked hard for everything he has, and understands and relates to the needs of ordinary working people.

Bush, a product of wealth and privilege swaddled in the elitist trappings of the vice presidency, cannot make that linkage.

As to his own character, Bush sends conflicting messages.

Is the real George Bush still the man he was before entombment in the vice presidency - a moderate, a spokesman for the old Republican establishment overthrown by Ronald Reagan, an internationalist and a doubter of supply-side theories? Or is he, in the pattern of all converts, even more dedicated to the rigidly conservative Reagan ideology than the original right wingers?

Is the real Bush the one who is so puritan he uses prissy euphemisms, such as saying "deep doo-doo" instead of using a more pithy term for manure? Or is he the filthy-mouthed locker-room jock who swears at television anchors and tells dock workers he "kicked a little ass" after debating vice presidential nominee Geraldine Ferraro?

Is the real Bush the influential adviser who was "in the loop" on every important White House policy decision? Or the ineffectual hanger-on who didn't have a clue that the White House was pursuing an arms-for-hostage deal?

Is the real Bush the candidate who pledges earnestly to balance the budget that got so out of whack during the Reagan-Bush years? Or the one who not only promises never to raise taxes but wants to cut them some more while offering no realistic way of raising revenue or specifying which federal programs he would cut to reduce the deficits?

Is the real Bush the fellow who never said a peep while the administration tried to get tax breaks for segregated colleges, made sweeping cuts in federal programs for minorities and the disadvantaged and ignored the growing plight of the homeless? Or the one who seems compassionate, saying "prosperity means helping your brothers and sisters, whoever they are, whatever they are, whatever their needs?"

Is the real Bush the one who hides behind a campaign official to issue a toughly-worded attack on his rival's integrity and then whines, when confronted, that although he stands by the attack he hadn't read it? Or is he the man who contends that he is "a tiger" unafraid to face down any foe, including Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev?

Is the real Bush the one who stands up for law enforcement officials and claims to be a law-and-order man? Or is he the candidate who whips out a plastic pistol, points out it could go undetected through metal detectors and "kill the pilot of an airplane" and then vows to oppose pending legislation that would outlaw such guns?

Is the real Bush the Word War II veteran who boldly takes the offensive against the press, against Dole, against prying questions about his role in the Iran-Contra affair? Or is he the wimp of legend, who has nothing to say that has not been scripted for him and rehearsed privately in advance?

Is the real Bush the only one in the race who has supported Reagan all the time on every issue, as he now tells New Hampshire voters? Or is he the one who said he'd never support a tax increase, "period", just as President Reagan agreed to a conference with Congress over deficit-reduction proposals that included tax increases?

The confusion over Bush's identity is compounded by the fact that the big jobs on his resume involved carrying out duties dependent upon secrecy and policies established largely by others - head of the CIA, chairman of the GOP National Committee, U.S. representative to China, ambassador to the United Nations. His public record tells us little of his own views as he carried out those roles.

His cautious nature and reluctance to take risks have left the voters with a career paper trail and little more. If Bush is to win over hearts and minds, he will have to reveal more of himself than we have yet seen.

Caption:
Drawing: George Bush

Copyright 1988 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: HSC0214522978

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

July 24, 1998

Probe finds no fed links to drug ring
Money channeled to Contras in 1980s

Author: Los Angeles Times

Edition: 3 STAR
Section: A
Page: 13
Dateline: WASHINGTON

Index Terms:
Drug Traffic

Estimated printed pages: 2

Article Text:

WASHINGTON - The Justice Department's internal watchdog said Thursday that he found no evidence that U.S. government officials protected a California drug-trafficking ring whose members contributed money to the Nicaraguan rebels known as Contras during the 1980s.

Inspector General Michael R. Bromwich, reporting on a 15-month investigation, said he concluded that the drug dealers had contributed money to the rebels, but the amounts were "relatively insignificant," and there was no evidence that Contra leaders or the CIA knew about them.

Bromwich's investigation, and its 407-page report, were produced in response to charges made by the San Jose Mercury News in 1996. The newspaper claimed that a San Francisco-based drug-trafficking ring introduced crack cocaine to Los Angeles, sent millions of dollars to the CIA-backed Contras, and operated under the protection of U.S. government officials.

"After interviewing more than 200 people and reviewing more than 40,000 pages of documents, we did not substantiate the main allegations suggested by the San Jose Mercury News articles," Bromwich said.

"While some drug traffickers supplying cocaine to Los Angeles drug dealers were Contra supporters, they were investigated and pursued by the Department of Justice. These investigations were not always successful, but we did not find that they were obstructed because of claims that these individuals were connected to Contras or the CIA."

The report said the two drug dealers at the center of the allegations were "Contra supporters, although their roles in this regard were marginal. . . . Both gave charitable contributions to the Contras and, because of their line of business, that money came from drug trafficking. The monetary amounts were relatively insignificant compared to the money they made in drug trafficking."

The report quoted one of the drug dealers as estimating their total contributions at about $49,000, and several of the dealers' associates provided even smaller estimates.

"Contra leaders have denied - and there is no evidence to contradict the denials - that they solicited drug funds or knew that drug money was coming into the Contra movement," according to the report.

"The implication that the drug trafficking . . . was connected to the CIA was also not supported by the facts," it added.

In addition, the report concluded that the explosion in crack cocaine trafficking in Los Angeles and across the United States "was not the result of any single source or seller."

Much of the apparent evidence in the San Jose Mercury News articles appeared to have been distorted or exaggerated, according to the report.

In 1977, the newspaper concluded that its reports were flawed and reporter Gary Webb resigned this year.

Copyright 1998 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: 3071326

freedomisahapislave
[smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

September 19, 1996

CIA faces pressure over reports that it supplied drugs to blacks

Author: Reuters News Service

Edition: 3 STAR
Section: a
NEWS
Page: 24
Dateline: WASHINGTON

Index Terms:
Drug Traffic

Estimated printed pages: 2

Article Text:

WASHINGTON - The CIA has been thrown on the defensive by news reports that it helped flood African-American neighborhoods in the United States with cocaine to finance Contra rebels fighting Nicaragua's leftist government in the 1980s.

CIA Director John Deutch, under pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus and a wide range of others, has ordered an internal investigation of the reports, which appeared in a three-part series last month in the San Jose Mercury News.

"Although I believe there is no substance to the allegations in the Mercury News, I do wish to dispel any lingering public doubt on the subject," Deutch wrote to the heads of the congressional intelligence oversight committees and two members of the California delegation on Sept. 4.

He said he had asked the CIA's inspector general, Frederick Hitz, to finish within 60 days a review of "all the allegations concerning the agency published by the newspaper."

Rep. Cynthia McKinney, a Georgia Democrat, lashed out Wednesday on the House floor at what she called the "Central Intoxication Agency," calling the drug allegations a "cloud of shame."

In its series titled "Dark Alliance," the Mercury News detailed a scheme that, it said funneled tons of cocaine to black Los Angeles neighborhoods and returned millions in drug profits to a CIA-funded, Contra guerrilla army in Nicaragua.

"It is one of the most bizarre alliances in modern history: the union of a U.S.-backed army attempting to overthrow a revolutionary socialist government and the Uzi-toting `gangstas' of Compton and South-Central Los Angeles," the Mercury News said.

The series traced the U.S. crack cocaine epidemic to two Nicaraguan drug dealers, Danilo Blandon and Norwin Meneses, who were civilian leaders of the CIA-backed FDN. The organization was the largest Nicaraguan Contra group fighting to overthrow the leftist Sandinista government.

Citing newly declassified material, court testimony and interviews, the newspaper reported that the pair had been recruited by the CIA to raise money for the Contras and turned to drug-running with at least tacit spy agency approval.

In his letter to members of Congress, Deutch said the CIA had "never had any relationship with either Blandon or Meneses."

Nor, contrary to the newspaper report, had it sought to have information regarding either of them withheld at the recent trial of a convicted Los Angeles drug dealer, he added.

The internal CIA investigation under way seems unlikely to satisfy prominent blacks and others who want an independent investigation.

On Saturday, the White House drug control policy director, retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey, joined those calling for a "full and thorough investigation."

Asked if the CIA would welcome an outside investigation, spokesman Mark Mansfield declined to answer directly but said: "We will cooperate fully with any review of this matter."

An investigator, who looked into reports of Contra drug trafficking for a Senate panel in the late 1980s, said he concluded that individual CIA officers in the field knew of the trafficking but the information was not passed up their chain of command.

"To say that the CIA was moving crack cocaine into California is, I think, clearly wrong," said the former Senate aide, who spoke on condition that he not be named.

However, the Senate aide said it was "absolutely true" that cocaine traffickers of the period had sought to buy "good will" in their shadowy netherworld by funding Contra guerrillas.

Caption:
Photo: Director John Deutch
Houston Chronicle file

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

Copyright 1996 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: HSC09191366328

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

DECEMBER 31, 1992

Bush labels six pardons "difficult call"
President defends his decision on major Iran-Contra figures

Author: ANA PUGA, Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau
Staff

Edition: 2 STAR
Section: A NEWS
Page: 1
Dateline: WASHINGTON

Index Terms:
Iranscam

Estimated printed pages: 2

Article Text:

WASHINGTON -- President Bush on Wednesday defended his controversial decision to grant pardons to major figures in the Iran-Contra affair as a "difficult call."

"Nobody is above the law. And I believe when people break the law that's a bad thing . . . " Bush said. "I've read some stupid comment to the contrary.

"But the Constitution is quite clear on the powers of the president, and sometimes the president has to make a very difficult call, and that's what I've done."

Independent prosecutor Lawrence Walsh and other critics of the Christmas Eve pardons have charged that the president shielded former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger and five other officials to cover up his own role in the scandal. Walsh has vowed to continue investigating the possibility that Bush is guilty of wrongdoing.

The White House announced Wednesday that Bush had asked former Attorney General Griffin Bell to represent him on matters related to the case.

Bell, who served as the nation's top law enforcement officer under Jimmy Carter, was hired after Walsh informed the president Tuesday that he would not be provided a copy of the deposition Bush gave to investigators in 1988.

The president asked for a copy of the sworn testimony on Dec. 14, and Bell was retained "to assist Bush in seeking to obtain a copy of this document," a White House statement said.

In addition, Bell will advise the president "should the independent counsel fail to complete his investigation during the president's term in office."

The statement was released after Bush answered a question about the pardons at an early morning meeting with reporters in the Rose Garden. The president dismissed the accusation that the pardons amounted to a manipulation of the the criminal justice system for political ends.

"I've read some rather frivolous reporting that I don't care about the law. I pride myself on 25 or more years of public service of serving honorably, decently, and with my integrity intact," Bush said.

"And certainly I wouldn't feel that way if I had a lack of respect for the law. And I don't think there is one single thing in my career that could lead anybody to look at my record and make a statement of that nature."

But a Gallup poll published in the newspaper USA Today on Wednesday said 54 percent of 608 people surveyed disapproved of the pardons. Only 27 percent approved and 19 percent had no opinion.

According to the survey, 49 percent thought Bush granted the pardons to spare himself legal investigation or embarrassment.

Bush was vice president during the Reagan administration, when U.S. officials engineered arms sales to Iran in exchange for American hostages in Lebanon. Proceeds from the sales were illegally used to fund the Nicaraguan Contras, despite a congressional ban on assistance to the rebels. Meanwhile, the Reagan administration publicly maintained that it would never bargain for the release of hostages.

Bush has said that he was purposely kept in the dark about the two operations and their interrelationship. Last week he promised to make public all documents relevant to his role in the affair, including some 1986 notes that the independent prosecutor has been demanding.

Weinberger opposed the original arms sales but was accused of later lying about the deal to congressional investigators and to Walsh's prosecutors.

Caption:
Mug: Griffin Bell (color)

Copyright 1992 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: 12*31*1102536

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

JULY 28, 1991

London banks reportedly used in secret U.S. arms sales to Iran

By Associated Press

Edition: 2 STAR
Section: A NEWS
Page: 1
Dateline: LONDON

Index Terms:
IRANSCAM BANKS

Estimated printed pages: 2

Article Text:

LONDON - London branches of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International were used to finance sales of U.S. anti-tank missiles to Iran during its war with Iraq, the Financial Times reported Saturday.

The leading British business daily, without quoting its sources, said the export of TOW missiles to Iran's Revolutionary Guards in 1985 was arranged by a British arms merchant who had boasted of his ties to former Lt. Col. Oliver North.

It said the arms dealer, Indian-born Ben Banerjee, who died of a heart attack in May 1990, had figured into the scandal in which North played a central role.

The report said Banerjee's family denied he was involved in the affair.

Since Banerjee appears to have acted only as a broker for the arms shipment, which was not directly exported from Britain, "the deal was not illegal" in the United Kingdom, the Financial Times said.

Luxembourg-based BCCI is at the center of a worldwide scandal involving allegations of fraud and money laundering. Regulators in eight countries - including the United States and Britain - began seizing its assets and operations earlier this month.

Saturday's report amplified accusations in the United States the scandal-tainted bank was used by North to set up accounts for covert operations.

BCCI, with its branches worldwide and strict privacy laws, was used by Saudi millionaire arms dealer Adnan Khashoggi to deposit money into North's Enterprise - the name by which his covert slush fund was known, said former Senate Iran-Contra counsel Arthur Liman. Enterprise money was then funneled to the Contras to circumvent a congressional ban on aiding the guerrillas.

The Financial Times said the 1985 deal involved $18.9 million and "at least two payments through separate branches" of BCCI in London that were disguised as shipments of 1,250 forklifts.

The report said Liman stated that BCCI was used for "as much as $10 million of bank transfers that paid for the secret sale of U.S. TOW anti-tank missiles and other weapons to Iran that were part of the Irangate scandal."

The story said the Enterprise funds were largely kept in accounts at a bank in Switzerland, Credit Suisse.

The Financial Times said Banerjee and his now defunct company, B R and W Industries, arranged the shipment of the arms to the Revolutionary Guards.

According to the story: "Documents detailing the deal show the original order from Iran's Revolutionary Guards was made through front companies in Liechtenstein and Panama.

"The missiles, priced at $7,500 each for a total cost of $9.375 million, together with rocket-propelled grenades, Strella anti-aircraft missiles and automatic rifles, were shipped to Iran through a front company in Dubai, the Arabian Gate Trading Company," the report said.

Officials estimate that at least $3.4 billion in world trade has been delayed by the BCCI collapse.

Copyright 1991 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: 07*28*799514

freedomisahapislave
[smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

Houston Chronicle

JULY 17, 1991

Column: Editorials

IGNORANCE AT TOP
If CIA nominee didn't know, he should have

By Staff

Edition: 2 STAR
Section: A NEWS
Page: 14

Index Terms:
Editorial Opinion

Estimated printed pages: 2

Article Text:

President Bush's nomination of Robert Gates to be director of central intelligence is, predictably enough, in deep trouble. In 1987, Gates was forced to withdraw his name from consideration when President Reagan nominated him for the same post.

Gates' immediate difficulty stems from the recent guilty plea of one of his former colleagues at the CIA, but the underlying problem was always there: his own profession of ignorance. Gates is now a national security aide to the president, but he was deputy director of the CIA during the Reagan administration when Oliver North and others were selling arms to Iran and diverting some of the proceeds to the Nicaraguan Contras. Gates' boss at the time, the late CIA Director William Casey, is generally presumed to have known the details of the rogue operation known as the Iran-Contra affair. One of Gates' CIA subordinates, Alan Fiers, recently admitted knowing about the fund diversion, alleged that at least one other top CIA official also kne w, and pleaded guilty to two counts of withholding that information from Congress.

Bush's nominee to be the president's chief provider of secret intelligence and informed analysis claims he knew little or nothing about Iran-Contra until just before it became public in November 1986. Barring introduction of conclusive evidence to the contrary, Gates must be taken at his word. However, his admission that he didn't know what his closest colleagues above and below him were up to does not inspire confidence in a man who seeks to become the nation's head spy.

Gates' problem is one he shares with former President Reagan and, to a lesser degree, with Bush himself. All three claim they didn't know important information with which their subordinates were all too familiar. Gates' defenders point to the fact that CIA operations are compartmentalized in such a way that no one person knows the whole picture. If they are right, however, that is grounds for drastic changes at the intelligence-gathering agency. Surely those at the top should both be aware and be accountable for their agency's activities. The Senate Intelligence Committee has voted to hear testimony from Gates and others next week, but to delay consideration of his nomination until the fall. Gates can be expected to reiterate his ignorance of CIA collusion with Oliver North and other Reagan administration officials in the Iran-Contra diversion. That ignorance is not something a top intelligence official can be proud of.

Copyright 1991 Houston Chronicle
Record Number: 07*17*797465

freedomisahapislave [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

peace and hotep,

InfoTrac Web: InfoTrac Newspapers.

AL General
AT GOVERNMENT'S PANTS ON FIRE.(Editorial)(Column)
CT Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, WA)
DP March 26, 2002 pB7
LW B7
NA Column
ND 20020327
OT (Editorial)(Column)
PT Newspaper
RM COPYRIGHT 2002 Gale Group
SN 0745-970X
XX 795
ZZ

Source: Seattle Post-Intelligencer (Seattle, WA), March 26, 2002
pB7.

Title: GOVERNMENT'S PANTS ON FIRE.(Editorial)(Column)

Electronic Collection: CJ84207003
RN: CJ84207003

Full Text COPYRIGHT 2002 Seattle Post-Intelligencer. All rights
reserved.
Reproduced with the permission of the Dialog Corporation by Gale Group.

Byline: SEAN GONSALVES Syndicated columnist

Did you hear about what the federal government's top lawyer told the
Supreme
Court a week ago? Solicitor General Theodore Olson testified that U.S.
officials have the right to lie to American citizens.

Why? Because, he said, misleading statements sometimes are needed to
protect
foreign policy interests. "It's easy to imagine an infinite number of
situations where the government might legitimately give out false
information," Olson said.

Even if you're a Bible-believing fundamentalist who thinks Robert Bork
and
William Bennett are the true guardians of Western morality, you don't
necessarily have to get your prayer beads in a knot over this one.

According to the first chapter of Exodus, the Egyptian midwives,
Shiph'rah and
Pu'ah, were blessed by the Lord despite their lying.

In their case, they didn't lie to the people, but to Pharaoh, who had
instituted a policy of male infanticide. Bottom line: The midwives'
misinformation move was an act of moral courage that saved Moses' life
so he
could lead the Israelites out of bondage.

But unless, or until, Bush can spontaneously combust and burn without
being
consumed, I'm not comfortable swallowing whole Olson's notion of Uncle
Sam
having the right to lie.

If he had said, "Government officials have a tendency to lie, if they
think
telling the truth will unnecessarily harm foreign policy interests,"
the story
about his testimony probably wouldn't have made me give it a second
thought.

After all, even the most cursory review of Cold War history will reveal
that
the feds lying to cover their foreign policy tracks is nothing new. But
a
right to lie?

If our government has a right to lie, then we citizens have a duty to
be
skeptical about official statements.

Just don't tell Attorney General John Ashcroft I said that. I don't
want to
end up a "detainee" in this war on terrorism for suggesting that
American
citizens actually question policy pronouncements because, after all,
our
government has the right to lie, especially when it comes to war.

Consider the recent release of more Richard Nixon Oval Office tapes.
Most
commentators have focused on what the former president had to say about
theVietnam War. But the researchers at Common Sense for Drug Policy
unearthed
a major root of another war - the war on drugs (see www.csdp.org).

In 1971, Nixon appointed a National Commission on Marijuana and Drug
Abuse,
aka the Shafer Commission, whose charge it was to do extensive weed
research
and then make some policy recommendations.

"You know, it's a funny thing: Every one of the bastards that are out
for
legalizing marijuana is Jewish. What the Christ is the matter with the
Jews,
Bob? ... I suppose it is because most of them are psychiatrists," Nixon
said
in a May 1971 meeting.

He went on to explain that people drink alcohol "to have fun" but
weed-smokers
light up just "to get high." Little wonder Washington Post staff writer
Gene
Weingarten wrote a piece recently asking: "Just what was he smoking?"

In another meeting, Nixon met with then-Pennsylvania Gov. Raymond
Shafer about
the commission's work. "You're enough of a pro to know that for you to
come
out with something that would run counter to what the Congress feels
... and
what we're planning to do, would make your commission just look bad as
hell,"
Nixon told Shafer, when he learned that the commission was about to
recommend
marijuana be legalized.

Kevin Zeese, president of Common Sense for Drug Policy, reports that
since the
commission issued its recommendation that marijuana offenses not be a
crime,
15 million people have been arrested on marijuana charges.

"Dope? Do you think the Russians allow dope? Hell no. Not if they catch
it,
they send them up. You see, homosexuality, dope, uh, immorality in
general:
These are the enemies of strong societies. That's why the Communists
and the
left-wingers are pushing it. They're trying to destroy us," Nixon said,
explaining his justification for the "all-out war" on marijuana use.

As Weingarten observes, the "Jew-homo-doper-Commie-shrink-lefty cabal
has not,
to date, destroyed us." What Weingarten didn't say was: The war on
drugs is
shrouded in misinformation, covering up the destruction it has wrought
in both
foreign and domestic places.

In a 1999 campaign speech, President Bush noted that "America has
tripled its
prison population in the last 15 years," which has resulted in "a
problem - an
estimated 1.3 million children who have one or both parents in prison."

Time for another commission to review our national drug laws. But this
time we
ought to demand a truth and reconciliation commission to counter the
right to
lie and affirm our right to truth and justice. [smiley=lipsrsealed2.gif]

Sean Gonsalves is a columnist with the Cape Cod Times. E-mail:
sgonsalves@capecodonline.com

-- End --

freedomisahapislave

Africa Speaks Reasoning Forum

GENERAL => Essays and Reasonings => Topic started by: seshatasefekht7 on September 14, 2003, 07:19:12 PM