AMERICA'S GATED COMMUNITY by The Cosmic Messenger

On the morning of November 8 middle America awoke to a jubliant atmosphere. Word quickly spread Congressional Republicans had lost control of the legislative branch of government. As the triumphant atmosphere blossomed forth, the sun came out to bath humanity in its rays of bliss while our feathered friends sang notes of happiness from treetops across the land. Even President Bush seemed to have been overwhelmed with emotion calling a press conference to announce Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld had stepped down contributing to the heightened elation of practically all earth's inhabitants.

Nothing is plausible with this Administration though and two weeks after the the mid-term elections voters are beginning to descend back to gravity from cloud nine as they start to contemplate Bush's Defense nomination, Robert Gates. The public's incertitude was set into motion immediately when national security analyst, Gareth Porter and independent journalist Jason Leopold published articles in succeeding weeks contradicting the corporate press's portrayal of Gates as an enlightened man likely to take a diplomatic path towards resolution of the Iraq conflict based on years of high ranking service in federal government positions. His resume includes stints with the National Security Council and CIA where he served as deputy directors there climbing the Intelligence ladders of each organization. In 1991, he became the the head of Central Intelligence after a provocative Senate confirmation.


Leopold describes Gates in distinct contrast to the canonized image being circulated nationally depicting him as a seasoned veteran familiar with Mideast relations who should win Senate confirmation easily. According to the veteran newsman, Gates' knowledge about the Iraq debacle dates back to the mid-1980's while at the CIA. During this time frame, Gates was responsible for gathering intelligence data which was forwarded to Saddam Hussein to aid him in the Iraq-Iran war.

"The secret intelligence sharing operation with Iraq was not only a highly questionable and possibly illegal operation but also may have jeopardized American lives and our national interests," asserts Senator Tom Harkin who served on Gate's CIA confirmation committe in 1991. "The photo reconnaissance, highly sensitive electronic eavesdropping and narrative texts provided to Saddam may not only have helped him in Iraq's war against Iran but also in the recent gulf war."

Even more alarming is the role Gates played in helping arm Hussein's opponent, Iran during the conflict. Based on memos and former colleague's testimony made public in 1991, Gates was alleged to have provided the Reagan White House security analysis which supported their ambitions for the region at the time.

"Gates was the pipeline for providing exclusive reports to the White House, intelligence that was at odds with the overwhelming bulk of intelligence reporting both from U.S. sources and foreign intelligence services," claims Thomas Barksdale who was responsible for dissecting information about Iranian military activity twenty years ago.

Other security associates who had served with Gates in the past including Harold Ford, Jennifer Glaudemans, Melvin Goodman and Alan Fiers testified, "Mr Gates and his influence have led to a prostitution of (Soviet) analysis." --- "Bob Gates has often depended too much on his own individual analytic judgments and has ignored or scorned the views of others whose assessments did not accord with his own." --- under Gates, the CIA was "trying to provide the intelligence analysis ... that would support the operational decision to sell arms to Iran." --- "Bob Gates understood the universe, understood the structure, understood that there was an operational - that there was a support operation being run out of the White House."

As daunting as Robert Gates' past may be based on his public record documented by Leopold, the former CIA Director's credibility is further shattered by Gareth Porter, a historian and national security policy analyst who suggests Gates is being summoned for duty again because the Bush White House possibly views him as a diplomatic emissary capable of negotiating a "grand bargain" which placates the interests of the United States, Iraq and Iran.

In his analogy, Porter implies, "the precondition for a new diplomatic policy toward Iran and Iraq, is the acceptance of the reality that the United States does not have the power to impose a solution on Iran but must make major concessions to Iranian interests in order to achieve it own interests. A grand bargain represents the only real hope for finding a way of curbing the sectarian violence in Iraq and avoiding a regional conflagration over the Iranian nuclear program."

Porter believes an end to Mid-East hostilities will come about once the U.S. concedes to the following demands:

• An end to U.S. hostile behavior

• Removing Iran's designation as a terrorist state including the “axis of evil” tag

• Lifting commercial sanctions

• Dropping the U.S. effort to limit Iran's access to peaceful use of nuclear technology

• Recognition of Iran's legitimate security interests in the region and U.S. assurances it won't attack either them or its allies in the future

In return for U.S. cooperation, Porter states "Iranian leaders have previously proposed to stop “material support to Palestinian opposition groups…from Iranian territory” as well as “pressure on these organizations to stop violent actions against civilians within [Israel’s] borders of 1967.” And it offered to accept the Arab League “Beirut declaration”—a Saudi-sponsored initiative in March 2002 which proposed a comprehensive peace, including the establishment of normal relations, with Israel based on Israel’s withdrawal to pre-1967 war lines."

Apparently, this kind of rationale coalesces with the public's desire for the Administration to seek a negotiated solution rather than the failed coercive tactics employed thus far. However, the looming question is whether Robert Gates is the best choice to either directly implement or act as a stealth advisor to whomever represents the United States when discussing terms of the arrangement.

The corporate press, in its haste to break a story have become news themselves by suggesting Gates will be approved with minimal Senate opposition in return for Bush dropping John Bolton's nomination to the United Nations post. This type of rumor is known as media speculation based on unnamed White House sources and is intended as a precursor to condition the public to a proposal. It's purpose is to measure national reaction and proceed forward if no substantial objections surface.

Gates is scheduled to go before the Senate in early December to plead the legitimacy of his nomination. The Administration would like to have him confirmed before the new Congress takes office in January of 2007. Although a diplomatic solution to the deadly stalemate in Iraq is what the public expects, a hasty endorsement of him would only prolong tensions. Neither the Iraqi or Iranian governments will bargain in good faith with the U.S. if they suspect a former security analyst like Gates is indirectly behind a peace proposal. He will be viewed as a representative of the Carlyle wing of the White House and not as a legitimate proponent of reconciliation.

The last person Americans need working on their behalf is another "yes man" willing to tell the White House what it wants to hear and experienced at expediting secret wars to advance corporate interests around the world. Robert Gates has proven he's capable of both as the Iranians and Iraqis know all too well. Let's keep him within the gated confines of the Bush country club and demand better from our Congressional leaders by pressuring them to turn thumbs down on this "good ole' boy" next month.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

WE'VE ONLY JUST BEGUN by The Cosmic Messenger

On November 7 Americans went to the voting booths across our land and told George Bush what they thought of one party government. At the end of the day, the Republican stranglehold on Congress had ended and representative government returned to the people.

Citizens overwhelming rejected the deployment of their sons and daughters to die in a war manufactured by leaders in its executive branch for the benefit of the oil cartel who own them. Ultimately, it was the repudiation of an irresponsible foreign policy which robbed middle class Americans through budget cutbacks to programs they depend on to pay for overseas military adventurism that has descended into a bloody, unmerciful morass with no decisive exit strategy in sight.

As compelling as the mid-term outcome was we cannot relent in our determination to influence how our leaders represent us. Citizens must remain vigilant to guard against the sort of demagogic, repressive behavior enacted the past six years so they don't become victims themselves. Unfortunately, the tools for the type of forcible subjugation witnessed at Abu Ghraib, practiced at the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay and being taught to Iraq's soldiers today were learned by enforcers who passed through the gates of Ft. Benning, Georgia which houses the Army's School of Americas (SOA).

This facility has the unenviable distinction of teaching its students brutal security techniques employed both in combat and counter-insurgency situations. According to documents obtained from the Pentagon in 1996 methods promoted constitute gross human rights violations such as torture, extortion and execution. Past graduates read like a Who's, Who of Central and South American puppet dictators including Manuel Noriega and Omar Torrijos of Panama, Leopoldo Galtieri and Roberto Viola of Argentina, Juan Velasco Alvarado of Peru, Guillermo Rodriguez of Ecuador, and Hugo Banzer Suarez of Bolivia.

It's this type of conduct, one reliant on covert militarism Americans rejected on November 7 and must end. How can we be sure they won't continue as a black operation funded in the future by Congress through a Defense appropiation to the Pentagon steathly hidden in the small print of a budget ?

Taking control of the legislative branch was a start but marches such as the non-violent demonstration planned for November 17-19 at the entrance to the Georgia base will impart a distinct message to our new wave of elected leaders the public means business and expects nothing less than an end to these types of military maneuvers.

To see how you can participate, view the link below.

SCHOOL OF THE ASSASSINS WATCH !

“If... the machine of government... is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law.” -- Henry David Thoreau

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

PELOSI ASSUMES COMMAND OF HOUSE

(WOMENSENEWS)--Democrats wrested control of the House of Representatives in yesterday's midterm elections, putting Nancy Pelosi of California in the position to smash through a political glass ceiling that has kept women out of the upper echelons of power throughout U.S. history.

In addition, the Senate will have at least one more woman and at least four additional Democratic women will become members of the House.

When House Democrats reconvene next year, they are expected to promote Pelosi to become Speaker of the House, which would put her third in line for the presidency and make her the first woman to hold the position, the most powerful in the legislative branch of government. Pelosi is also a strong backer of abortion rights; if she controls the House she can be expected to put the breaks on a strategy pushed successfully by Republicans over the last dozen years to chip away at abortion rights.

Democratic control of the Senate--an uncertainty at presstime--could prevent President Bush from putting another anti-choice justice onto the Supreme Court if a vacancy opens up.

South Dakota Abortion Ban Defeated

Meanwhile, South Dakota's statewide ban on virtually all abortions appeared on its way to defeat. Also, Roger Hunt, the state legislator who wrote the abortion ban law and funneled $750,000 in the referendum campaign also at this writing to be in jeopardy of not winning re-election.

Dem Women Make Gains

Democratic women also made gains in both chambers of Congress on Tuesday. In the House, women will see at least four new female members, and possibly many more. Sure pickups include Democrats Kirsten Gillibrand and Yvette Clark of New York, Betty Sutton of Ohio and Kathy Castor of Florida. A number of other House races featuring women were too close to call.

Democrat Tammy Duckworth, the fighter pilot who lost both her legs in Iraq, conceded defeat at 12:15, losing her her bid to take over the district that had been represented by retiring abortion foe Henry Hyde. During her concession speech, the crowd chanted: "2008, 2008."

In the Senate, women will increase their numbers by at least one. Minnesota Democrat Amy Klobuchar beat Republican Rep. Mark Kennedy in the race for the seat left open by retiring Democrat Mark Dayton.

Missouri Democrat Claire McCaskill also has a good chance of winning entry to the upper chamber. She's mounted a strong challenge to Sen. Jim Talent, a freshman Republican from Missouri. Her race was not called last night.

All Incumbent Female Senators Win

Meanwhile, all female incumbents who faced re-election to the Senate won: These were Democrats Maria Cantwell of Washington state, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, Dianne Feinstein of California and Hillary Clinton of New York and Republicans Olympia Snowe and Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas.

Republican women in the House, meanwhile, took a hit as incumbents Anne Northup of Kentucky and Nancy Johnson of Connecticut were ousted.

With Democrats in control of the House, women are in line to advance to high positions in party leadership and on committees. Four women are in line to take over control of House panels, and numerous other women are poised to control of House subcommittees.

Dem Women Poised for Powerful Seats in House

Most significant, New York Rep. Louise Slaughter will likely become chair of House Rules--the committee that sets the parameters of floor debate. Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald of California will chair the House Administration Committee, which oversees federal elections and day-to-day operations in the chamber.

New York Rep. Nydia Velazquez is in line to rule the Small Business Committee, a panel of special significance to women because they are becoming independent entrepreneurs in disproportionate numbers.

And Rep. Jane Harman of California is next in line on the House Intelligence Committee, which oversees the intelligence community, a key position in the post-Sept. 11 security environment. It is unclear whether Harman will assume the position given her reportedly sour relationship with Pelosi.

In terms of sheer numbers, it was unclear whether 2006 will match 1992, when women nearly doubled their ranks in both chambers. That year, women picked up 19 House seats and three Senate seats,putting 47 women in the House and seven women in the Senate. Before today's election, there were 67 women in the House and 14 women in the Senate, making women 15 percent of the entire legislative branch.

The unprecedented gains of 1992 were due to a combination of factors that aren't present today, the main one being an unusually high number of open seats, the best opportunities for female political aspirants to enter Congress.

In addition, House districts are less competitive now than they were in 1992, thanks to a 2001 redistricting process that strengthened most incumbents, most of whom are male. And although there are several scandals on Capitol Hill this year, none has engaged the female electorate in the same way that the sexual harassment investigation into Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas did in 1992.

Many Races Not Yet Called

Still, odds looked good on Tuesday night that women would make considerable gains. Among the races where women were running strong include Democrats Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, Diane Farrell of Connecticut, Tammy Duckworth and Andrea Zinga of Illinois, Lois Murphy of Pennsylvania, Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, Christine Jennings of Florida, Carol Shea-Porter of New Hampshire, Darcy Burner of Washington state, Nancy Boyda of Kansas, Tessa Hafen and Jill Derby of Nevada, and Ellen Simon of Arizona.

Republicans looked sure to pick up at least one new female House member, Mary Fallin of Oklahoma. But two other favorite challengers--Martha Rainville of Vermont and Joy Padgett of Ohio--lost to Democrats.

Democratic challengers who lost their races include Phyllis Busansky of Florida, Linda Stender of New Jersey, Judy Feder of Virginia. There are also several close races featuring two women that were too close to call last night, including an open-seat Minnesota match-up between Democrat Patty Wetterling and Republican Michele Bachmann; a New Mexico race between Democrat Patricia Madrid and Republican Heather Wilson in New Mexico; a Colorado contest between Democrat Angie Paccione and Republican Marilyn Musgrave in Colorado, and two Ohio races, featuring Democrat Mary Jo Kilroy versus Republican Deborah Pryce and Democrat Victoria Wulsin versus Republican Jean Schmidt.

Allison Stevens is Washington bureau chief at Women's eNews.

Women's eNews welcomes your comments. E-mail us at editors@womensenews.org.


Women's eNews Spotlight on 2006 Midterm Election

Races:http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2832/

The Center for American Women and Politics:http://www.cawp.rutgers.edu/

The Women and Politics Institute:http://wandp.american.edu/



Copyright 2006 Women's eNews.

YOUR VOTING GUIDE by The Cosmic Messenger

On Tuesday November 7 voters will go to the polls to decide what direction the country will take over the final two years of the Bush presidency. They must ask themselves whether the system of one party government which has ruled the past six years is in their best interest to maintain or is it time for new management of the nation's affairs which would address the concerns of middle class Americans. Many of you have probably already decided what party you'll vote for based on economic, ethical and personal factors but before casting a ballot next week I'd like to present some elements which I think are of primary importance when weighing your decision regardless of political sentiment.

Beneath the photograph of the Congressional building you'll find a link to a site which provides the voting records in 2005 for each state's Representative or Senator to assist you in your evaluation of them. Rather than listening to a biased political commercial, examining their track record will give you a factual basis to make a decision with.

CONGRESSIONAL VOTING RECORDS

Below I've cited a list of issues which I believe everyone should consider irrespective of social or economic class if we're to advance forward as a united, contemporary civilized nation. You may have questions of your own I've overlooked or dismiss them altogether as inapplicable but my intention is to arouse your emotions and consider points beyond the campaign spin.

U

Has your Congressperson voted for or opposed any of the following ?

• To allow torture despite the Geneva Conventions prohibition against it



• Illegal Spying or Wiretaps of U.S. citizens
  



• Suspending the Constitution in a wartime situation
  



• The Military Commissions Act
  



• Automatic approval for funding of the Iraq war
  



• The Patriot Act
  



• Allowing the CIA to operate domestically
  



• Supports Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld
  



• Accepted money from corporate lobbyists such as Jack Abramoff or Ralph Reed
  



• Favors No-Bid contracts to private defense contractors like Halliburton
  



• Favors government subsidies to energy corporations such as Exxon
  



• Supports privatizing Social Security or won't state a position publicly
  



• Voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug bill
  



• Voted for School Vouchers and No Child Left Behind
  



• Reduced funding for college students' Pell Grants
  



• Voted for budget cuts affecting women and children
  



• Opposes stem cell research
  



• Helped to impede investigations of ethical misconduct by Mark Foley & Tom Delay
  



• Failed to account for fraud associated with Katrina aftermath

Click The You Tube Video Below To See What's At Stake With Your Vote !

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.