portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts global

corporate dominance | human & civil rights | imperialism & war

Hitler is rolling in his grave with envy!

two stories documenting the gallop to fascism
-white house lawyers tell agencies to ingnore the G.A.O. ruling on video news releases
-pentagon says preemptive strikes(ya' know, what Nazi's were convicted of) now official policy
---Hitler is rolling in his grave with envy!---
LA Times
By John Hendren
WASHINGTON Two years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the Pentagon has formally included in key strategic plans provisions for launching preemptive strikes against nations thought to pose a threat to the United States.
The doctrine also now stipulates that the U.S. will use "active deterrence" in concert with its allies "if we can" but could act unilaterally otherwise, Defense officials said.
The changes codify the more assertive defense policy adopted by the Bush administration since the Sept. 11 attacks and are included in a "National Military Strategy" and "National Defense Strategy," reports that are part of a comprehensive review of military strategy conducted every four years.
"The president has the obligation to protect the country," said Douglas J. Feith, the Defense Department's undersecretary for policy. "And I don't think that there's anything in our Constitution that says that the president should not protect the country unless he gets some non-American's participation or approval of that."
Pentagon managers use the strategic plan to guide such decisions as where to place bases, which bases to eliminate, what weapons to buy and where to position them. The heads of the United States' regional commands across the globe, in turn, use the strategy to prioritize spending and form strategies for eliminating threats in their regions.
"The potentially catastrophic impact of an attack against the United States, its allies and its interests may necessitate actions in self-defense to preempt adversaries before they can attack," the National Military Strategy states. A previous version, compiled in 1997, did not include plans for preemptive attacks.
However, Feith said that the United States would for the first time invite close allies such as the United Kingdom to review classified portions of U.S. defense strategy as part of the Quadrennial Defense Review, a four-year military policy and spending plan.
But the new strategy document further shifts the nation from the Cold War strategy of containing Eastern Europe to a global strategy of taking on enemies that emerge unexpectedly as the administration argues Afghanistan did after the Sept. 11 attacks and even terrorist organizations within friendly nations.
It appears to move the nation further from reliance on such international coalitions as NATO (news - web sites) and more toward what Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld has called "coalitions of the willing" under clear American leadership, analysts said.
"NATO is kind of missing in action now in their strategy," said Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Lexington Institute, a public policy group in Arlington, Va. "During the Clinton years coalition warfare with the other members of NATO was a centerpiece to our strategy, and now the administration is expecting almost nothing from the Europeans."
In some cases, respected global organizations seem to be viewed with suspicion. In describing the vulnerabilities of the United States, the document uses strong language to list international bodies such as the International Court of Justice, created under a treaty that the United States has declined to sign alongside terrorists.
"Our strength as a nation-state will continue to be challenged by those who employ a strategy of the weak using international [forums], judicial processes and terrorism," the document states.
The concern, Feith explained, was that some nations would try to criminalize American foreign policy by challenging it in international courts.
During the Cold War, the United States used the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Alliance in an effort to build world consensus against anticipated threats from the Chinese and the now dissolved Soviet bloc. The new strategy highlights the United States' increasing inability to predict where the next conflict will occur, Feith said.
"I don't think that the world gives us the luxury of picking areas," Feith said. "We have interests all over the world. I dare say that if anybody before September 11, 2001, was listing places that we would want to focus on as a matter of priority, Afghanistan would have been rather low on the list."

White House to agencies: Ignore GAO's ruling on 'illegal' TV news releases

Ken Herman
Cox News Service
Mar. 15, 2005 12:00 AM

WASHINGTON - The White House, intent on continuing to crank out "video news releases" that look like television news stories, has told government agency heads to ignore a Government Accountability Office memo criticizing the practice as illegal propaganda.

In a memo on Friday, Joshua Bolten, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said the lawyers the White House depends on disagree with the GAO's conclusions.

Accompanying Bolten's memo was a letter from Steven Bradbury, principal deputy assistant attorney general in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel, who said video news releases "are the television equivalent of the printed press release." advertisement

"They can be a cost-effective means to distribute information through local news outlets, and their use by private and public entities has been widespread since the early 1990s, including by numerous federal agencies," Bradbury said.

Comptroller General David Walker of the GAO said Monday that his agency is "disappointed by the administration's actions" in telling agency heads to ignore the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress.

"This is not just a legal issue, it's also an ethical matter," Walker said. "The taxpayers have a right to know when the government is trying to influence them with their own money."

Bradbury's memo said video news releases are legal and legitimate as long as they don't "constitute advocacy for any particular position or view."

The GAO, in a Feb. 17 memo to agency heads, said its review of video news releases distributed to television stations by the Department of Health and Human Services and the Office of National Drug Control Policy showed violations of federal law barring the use of government money for propaganda. The GAO said, "Television-viewing audiences did not know that stories they watched on television news programs about the government were, in fact, prepared by the government."

Giving no indication that the administration would change its policy, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said, "It's very clear to the TV stations where they are coming from."

But the GAO, in the Feb. 17 memo from Walker, said that's not enough.

"They are intended to be indistinguishable from news segments broadcast to the public by independent television news organizations," Walker wrote. "To help accomplish this goal, these stories include actors or others hired to portray 'reporters' and may be accompanied by suggested scripts that television news anchors can use to introduce the story during the broadcast."

Former White House press secretary Mike McCurry, who held the job in the Clinton administration, said there was a "considerable amount of video news release activity" during those years, but much of it was limited to raw footage."
History 19.Mar.2005 18:26


The Nuremburg Tribunal ranked the "waging of aggressive war" as the supreme crime because through it all other war crimes followed.

If U think Adolph was tickled, wait til Goebbels chimes in 21.Mar.2005 20:18

DLi dlimay7@aol.com

Add the following 2 stories from the White House secret bunker of horrors and you'll weep a lot louder:

A) Chief Chickenhawk's decision to retain Warlord Don(aka the Rump who never met a carpet-bomber he didn't like)as Pentagon chief. That's like giving extra bonus to Ken Lay for running a billion-dollar fraud at Enron(oh, I forget, Ken's already done that to himself but his valuable connections with W's Oil Gang has kept him free on the streets so far!)

B) The naming of another "woeful-wits" Neo-con(aka Wolf Paul to his endearing mates) to the World Bank(oh, I forget also, that the WB is, after all, Global Robber Baron, Inc., so sending the "Israel-first" undersecretary of "Offense" to the WB is par for the course for the Evil Empire.) Remember, Wolfie was the "guru" who told Congress shortly after the Imperial Invasion in 2003 that the figure of $60-$90 Billion of Iraq war costs would be "wildly off the mark" and that Iraq's oil revenues would largely pay for the "reconstruction costs." Now it turns out that "woeful-wits" Paul was indeed himself "wildly off the mark," as the illegal Invasion/Occupation has begun its Year #3, with no end in sight, and the USA--by official figures(that will no doubt prove to be ENRONESQUE in its creative accounting)--already has spent nearly $300 BILLION or more on this "Shock-N-Awe" debacle!