Saturday, May 31, 2003
The VIPs are the Boss
And here is the most recent memo addressed to Bush, dated May 1, 2003, from the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, published on TomPaine.commonsense. Here is an excerpt from the memo:
"Glen Rangwala, the Cambridge University analyst who exposed the plagiarism by British intelligence of "evidence" on Iraq from a graduate student in California, suggests that much of the information on such weapons has come from Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress (INC), which has received Pentagon money for intelligence gathering. "The INC saw the demand and provided what was needed," says Rangwala. "The implication is that they polluted the whole US intelligence effort."
It is well known in intelligence circles that Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz has overseen the polluting of the stream of intelligence reporting on Iraq with a flood of fabricated material from Chalabi, who has few supporters and still fewer sources inside Iraq. When both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency refused to give credence to such reporting, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld set up his own intelligence analysis unit headed by Rich Haver -- a passed-over but still ambitious aspirant to the post of CIA director. The contribution of reporting from émigrés has been highly touted for months by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, who seem unaware of Machiavelli’s warning that of all intelligence sources, exiles are the least reliable.
In the face of like admonitions from the Intelligence Community, Wolfowitz has chosen to take the offensive. He has stated in public, for example, that CIA analysis "is not worth the paper it is written on."
"Glen Rangwala, the Cambridge University analyst who exposed the plagiarism by British intelligence of "evidence" on Iraq from a graduate student in California, suggests that much of the information on such weapons has come from Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress (INC), which has received Pentagon money for intelligence gathering. "The INC saw the demand and provided what was needed," says Rangwala. "The implication is that they polluted the whole US intelligence effort."
It is well known in intelligence circles that Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz has overseen the polluting of the stream of intelligence reporting on Iraq with a flood of fabricated material from Chalabi, who has few supporters and still fewer sources inside Iraq. When both the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency refused to give credence to such reporting, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld set up his own intelligence analysis unit headed by Rich Haver -- a passed-over but still ambitious aspirant to the post of CIA director. The contribution of reporting from émigrés has been highly touted for months by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, who seem unaware of Machiavelli’s warning that of all intelligence sources, exiles are the least reliable.
In the face of like admonitions from the Intelligence Community, Wolfowitz has chosen to take the offensive. He has stated in public, for example, that CIA analysis "is not worth the paper it is written on."
# posted by scorpiorising : 6:26 PM |
The fox is in the rabbit hole.
The memo sent to Bush on February 8th, 2003, by the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPs), concerning the lack of intelligence, in the intelligence on Iraq, was published in Counterpunch on that date. Here is an excerpt:
"The key question is whether Iraq's flouting of a UN resolution justifies war. This is the question the world is asking. Secretary Powell's presentation does not come close to answering it.
One might well come away from his briefing thinking that the Iraqis are the only ones in flagrant violation of UN resolutions. Or one might argue that there is more urgency to the need to punish the violator of Resolution 1441 than, say, of Resolution 242 of 1967 requiring Israel to withdraw from the Arab territories it occupied that year. More urgency? You will not find many Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims who would agree."
It has been the death of innocence for these intelligence officials, when Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz took control. I suppose these veterans have been living under the illusion of intelligence gathering without pretext. They are an important group, because where there is doubt, there is room for learning. These Cheney led neocons have no doubts, at least none that they admit to themselves, which makes them dangerous fanatics.
In today's Los Angelas Times , in an article reprinted in the Times Picayune in New Orleans, Colin Powell was quoted defending the intelligence used to wage war on Iraq:
"Everything I presented on Feb. 5th, I can tell you, there was good sourcing for, was not politicized. It was solid information," Powell said. "Let people look into it. Let people examine it."
"Let people examine it," may very well be an invitation by Powell, perhaps unconscious, to expose the manipulation of intelligence to stage this war, given the revelations that he expressed serious doubts about intelligence concerning Iraq with the British Defense Secretary, Jack Straw, even while presenting the same intelligence to the U.N. Security Council. From the Guardian Unlimited:
"The foreign secretary reportedly expressed concern that claims being made by Mr Blair and President Bush could not be proved. The problem, explained Mr Straw, was the lack of corroborative evidence to back up the claims.
Much of the intelligence were assumptions and assessments not supported by hard facts or other sources.
Mr Powell shared the concern about intelligence assessments, especially those being presented by the Pentagon's office of special plans set up by the US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz.
Mr Powell said he had all but "moved in" with US intelligence to prepare his briefings for the UN security council, according to the transcripts.
But he told Mr Straw he had come away from the meetings "apprehensive" about what he called, at best, circumstantial evidence highly tilted in favour of assessments drawn from them, rather than any actual raw intelligence."
In the meantime, we have Wolfowitz openly and arrogantly stating the true reasons for this war, as quoted in next month's Vanity Fair, and explored in this MSNBC article:
"IN AN INTERVIEW in the next issue of Vanity Fair magazine, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is quoted as saying a “huge” reason for the war was to enable Washington to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia.
“For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on,” Wolfowitz was quoted as saying.
“Almost unnoticed but huge” was the need to maintain U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia as long as Saddam was in power, he was quoted as saying."
Then the MSNBC article notes that Wolfowitz backed down from a key point, and published a slightly different version of the Vanity Fair interview on the Pentagon web site:
"Some of the quotations in the Vanity Fair article differ from the versions offered by the Pentagon, which suggested that Wolfowitz meant to say withdrawal of U.S. troops from Saudi Arabia was an important outcome of the war, not an important reason for it."
It sounds like MSNBC actually believes Wolfowitz. But Wolfowitz is playing dodge ball, and floating the true reasons, at least one, for this war.
The fox is in the rabbit hole.
"The key question is whether Iraq's flouting of a UN resolution justifies war. This is the question the world is asking. Secretary Powell's presentation does not come close to answering it.
One might well come away from his briefing thinking that the Iraqis are the only ones in flagrant violation of UN resolutions. Or one might argue that there is more urgency to the need to punish the violator of Resolution 1441 than, say, of Resolution 242 of 1967 requiring Israel to withdraw from the Arab territories it occupied that year. More urgency? You will not find many Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims who would agree."
It has been the death of innocence for these intelligence officials, when Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz took control. I suppose these veterans have been living under the illusion of intelligence gathering without pretext. They are an important group, because where there is doubt, there is room for learning. These Cheney led neocons have no doubts, at least none that they admit to themselves, which makes them dangerous fanatics.
In today's Los Angelas Times , in an article reprinted in the Times Picayune in New Orleans, Colin Powell was quoted defending the intelligence used to wage war on Iraq:
"Everything I presented on Feb. 5th, I can tell you, there was good sourcing for, was not politicized. It was solid information," Powell said. "Let people look into it. Let people examine it."
"Let people examine it," may very well be an invitation by Powell, perhaps unconscious, to expose the manipulation of intelligence to stage this war, given the revelations that he expressed serious doubts about intelligence concerning Iraq with the British Defense Secretary, Jack Straw, even while presenting the same intelligence to the U.N. Security Council. From the Guardian Unlimited:
"The foreign secretary reportedly expressed concern that claims being made by Mr Blair and President Bush could not be proved. The problem, explained Mr Straw, was the lack of corroborative evidence to back up the claims.
Much of the intelligence were assumptions and assessments not supported by hard facts or other sources.
Mr Powell shared the concern about intelligence assessments, especially those being presented by the Pentagon's office of special plans set up by the US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz.
Mr Powell said he had all but "moved in" with US intelligence to prepare his briefings for the UN security council, according to the transcripts.
But he told Mr Straw he had come away from the meetings "apprehensive" about what he called, at best, circumstantial evidence highly tilted in favour of assessments drawn from them, rather than any actual raw intelligence."
In the meantime, we have Wolfowitz openly and arrogantly stating the true reasons for this war, as quoted in next month's Vanity Fair, and explored in this MSNBC article:
"IN AN INTERVIEW in the next issue of Vanity Fair magazine, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz is quoted as saying a “huge” reason for the war was to enable Washington to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia.
“For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on,” Wolfowitz was quoted as saying.
“Almost unnoticed but huge” was the need to maintain U.S. forces in Saudi Arabia as long as Saddam was in power, he was quoted as saying."
Then the MSNBC article notes that Wolfowitz backed down from a key point, and published a slightly different version of the Vanity Fair interview on the Pentagon web site:
"Some of the quotations in the Vanity Fair article differ from the versions offered by the Pentagon, which suggested that Wolfowitz meant to say withdrawal of U.S. troops from Saudi Arabia was an important outcome of the war, not an important reason for it."
It sounds like MSNBC actually believes Wolfowitz. But Wolfowitz is playing dodge ball, and floating the true reasons, at least one, for this war.
The fox is in the rabbit hole.
# posted by scorpiorising : 11:41 AM |
Friday, May 30, 2003
Doubting Intelligence
These guys just don't get it. First we have Rumsfeld and Condi Rice pushing for regime change in Iran, written about in the very excellent Warblogging (scan for May 30). Apparently though, Rumsfeld is often an island unto himself. He was wrong about the number of troops that will be needed as per this New York Times article, dated May 30:
"Predicting trends in Iraq is not easy. But with 160,000 American and British troops now in Iraq and tens of thousands more providing logistical support from Kuwait, General Shinseki seems to have got it more right than the defense secretary.
Certainly, the initial Bush administration plans to reduce American forces to less than two divisions by September, a force of 70,000 or substantially less, including logistical support, now seems unrealistic.
Just this week, military commanders disclosed that the Third Infantry Division, the unit that led the Army attack to Baghdad, was not going home next month as expected. Instead, its duty in Iraq is being extended so it can be deployed to hot spots outside Baghdad and serve as a reserve force in the capital."
Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and their neocons in the Pentagon were wrong about wmd's, and this Kristof column talks of a group formed, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (its beginning to sound more and more monty pythonysque), because apparently sanity has gone out the window. The intelligence community is pissed, and apparently they don't want some green vegetable neocon in the Pentagon feeding them disinformation, when it has been the intelligence community's job to do this for decades:
"The Al Qaeda connection and nuclear weapons issue were the only two ways that you could link Iraq to an imminent security threat to the U.S.," notes Greg Thielmann, who retired in September after 25 years in the State Department, the last four in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research. "And the administration was grossly distorting the intelligence on both things."
The outrage among the intelligence professionals is so widespread that they have formed a group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, that wrote to President Bush this month to protest what it called "a policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportions."
"While there have been occasions in the past when intelligence has been deliberately warped for political purposes," the letter said, "never before has such warping been used in such a systematic way to mislead our elected representatives into voting to authorize launching a war."
Irony dully noted.
Meanwhile, back in England, Tony Blair is facing the heat of the case of the disappearing wmd's in Iraq. Colin Powell and Jack Straw shared doubts about the intelligence on Iraq, much as we are having doubts, I suppose on their intelligence to keep quiet about the doubts.
More on this later.
"Predicting trends in Iraq is not easy. But with 160,000 American and British troops now in Iraq and tens of thousands more providing logistical support from Kuwait, General Shinseki seems to have got it more right than the defense secretary.
Certainly, the initial Bush administration plans to reduce American forces to less than two divisions by September, a force of 70,000 or substantially less, including logistical support, now seems unrealistic.
Just this week, military commanders disclosed that the Third Infantry Division, the unit that led the Army attack to Baghdad, was not going home next month as expected. Instead, its duty in Iraq is being extended so it can be deployed to hot spots outside Baghdad and serve as a reserve force in the capital."
Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and their neocons in the Pentagon were wrong about wmd's, and this Kristof column talks of a group formed, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (its beginning to sound more and more monty pythonysque), because apparently sanity has gone out the window. The intelligence community is pissed, and apparently they don't want some green vegetable neocon in the Pentagon feeding them disinformation, when it has been the intelligence community's job to do this for decades:
"The Al Qaeda connection and nuclear weapons issue were the only two ways that you could link Iraq to an imminent security threat to the U.S.," notes Greg Thielmann, who retired in September after 25 years in the State Department, the last four in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research. "And the administration was grossly distorting the intelligence on both things."
The outrage among the intelligence professionals is so widespread that they have formed a group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, that wrote to President Bush this month to protest what it called "a policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportions."
"While there have been occasions in the past when intelligence has been deliberately warped for political purposes," the letter said, "never before has such warping been used in such a systematic way to mislead our elected representatives into voting to authorize launching a war."
Irony dully noted.
Meanwhile, back in England, Tony Blair is facing the heat of the case of the disappearing wmd's in Iraq. Colin Powell and Jack Straw shared doubts about the intelligence on Iraq, much as we are having doubts, I suppose on their intelligence to keep quiet about the doubts.
# posted by scorpiorising : 5:36 PM |
Thursday, May 29, 2003
Laboring to Deceive
I've been planning a trip out west, so a bit out of commission. The issue of no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq is making the blogging rounds, and the mainstream media as well. I think the issue was a trap to begin with, with many being led into saying that this war would be justified somewhow if wmd's were found.
This war could never be justified under any guise, so the hand-wringing of those who believed the administration on the wmd issue, is absurd to watch. Their lies were transparent to begin with, their true motivations transparent to begin with: empire building, at the expense of the economy at home, at the expense of the American people. At the expense of the good trust of our longtime allies and the peoples of the world. But in case you want to be reminded of the parade of lies before during and after the war, check out the Whiskey Bar, and "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we labor to deceive":
"Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found.
Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
May 21, 2003
Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
May 26, 2003
They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld
Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations
May 27, 2003
For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
May 28, 2003
Posted by billmon at May 29, 2003 03:20 AM | TrackBack "
There you have it, Wolfowitz coming clean on the issue, and nary a stir in the mainstream media. If people eat this shit, then they deserve to live in a pig sty.
This war could never be justified under any guise, so the hand-wringing of those who believed the administration on the wmd issue, is absurd to watch. Their lies were transparent to begin with, their true motivations transparent to begin with: empire building, at the expense of the economy at home, at the expense of the American people. At the expense of the good trust of our longtime allies and the peoples of the world. But in case you want to be reminded of the parade of lies before during and after the war, check out the Whiskey Bar, and "Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we labor to deceive":
"Before the war, there's no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found.
Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
May 21, 2003
Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we're interrogating, I'm confident that we're going to find weapons of mass destruction.
Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
May 26, 2003
They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer.
Donald Rumsfeld
Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations
May 27, 2003
For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.
Paul Wolfowitz
Vanity Fair interview
May 28, 2003
Posted by billmon at May 29, 2003 03:20 AM | TrackBack "
There you have it, Wolfowitz coming clean on the issue, and nary a stir in the mainstream media. If people eat this shit, then they deserve to live in a pig sty.
# posted by scorpiorising : 4:48 PM |
Monday, May 26, 2003
A voice in the wind.
Senator Robert Byrd is a voice in the wind. Prophet-like he speaks a truth that few dare admit in this country. A war fought, thousands killed, based on lies, distortions and disinformation. Is anyone listening?
"We just fought a war that didn't need to be fought," he says, sitting on a white armchair in his Senate office. "There was no real justification for sending those 300,000 men and women to Iraq to fight. Contrary to what Mr. Bush tried to convince this nation of, Saddam Hussein did not constitute an imminent danger to this nation. . . . We've lost 145 men and women killed -- not a great number but too great a number. We didn't need to lose any of them. And we killed thousands of men and women and children in Iraq! Thousands of 'em! That was needless slaughter."
He pauses, but only long enough to draw sufficient breath to launch another verbal fusillade. "We have an administration that has projected this new doctrine of preemptive strike -- totally foreign, totally alien to our way of life -- and we're contemplating attacking other nations without provocation...
"And what is this binge we're on in defense spending?" he asks. "I'm a strong defense man. I supported Johnson and Nixon on Vietnam. I've supported strong defense ever since I got to Congress. But here they are, asking for $15 billion over last year. And last year was 15 percent over the previous year. And the previous year was 10 percent over the previous year. What do we want all this for? We're already spending more than the other 18 NATO nations combined, plus the eight rogue nations!"
He gets up, shuffles toward the door, a tiny, wizened man in a black three-piece suit. He stops, turns around.
"What are we gonna do with all this?" he asks. "What new worlds do they want to conquer now? We went through Iraq like a dose of salts. We were told by this president that Saddam Hussein constituted an imminent threat to our security. Bunk! That man couldn't even get a plane off the ground!"
"We just fought a war that didn't need to be fought," he says, sitting on a white armchair in his Senate office. "There was no real justification for sending those 300,000 men and women to Iraq to fight. Contrary to what Mr. Bush tried to convince this nation of, Saddam Hussein did not constitute an imminent danger to this nation. . . . We've lost 145 men and women killed -- not a great number but too great a number. We didn't need to lose any of them. And we killed thousands of men and women and children in Iraq! Thousands of 'em! That was needless slaughter."
He pauses, but only long enough to draw sufficient breath to launch another verbal fusillade. "We have an administration that has projected this new doctrine of preemptive strike -- totally foreign, totally alien to our way of life -- and we're contemplating attacking other nations without provocation...
"And what is this binge we're on in defense spending?" he asks. "I'm a strong defense man. I supported Johnson and Nixon on Vietnam. I've supported strong defense ever since I got to Congress. But here they are, asking for $15 billion over last year. And last year was 15 percent over the previous year. And the previous year was 10 percent over the previous year. What do we want all this for? We're already spending more than the other 18 NATO nations combined, plus the eight rogue nations!"
He gets up, shuffles toward the door, a tiny, wizened man in a black three-piece suit. He stops, turns around.
"What are we gonna do with all this?" he asks. "What new worlds do they want to conquer now? We went through Iraq like a dose of salts. We were told by this president that Saddam Hussein constituted an imminent threat to our security. Bunk! That man couldn't even get a plane off the ground!"
# posted by scorpiorising : 5:15 PM |
Sunday, May 25, 2003
I want to grow a garden.
Okay, okay, I haven't blogged for 4 whole days. Shhhh, inner parent, let me just write for gosh sakes. I've been sorting through a few things. Journaling. Journaling is the salt sifter, the sand filter. I'm a prospector panning for gold right now. It is the gold of thoughts that I am releasing as though I just blew the dam with dynamite, and words like rusing water came flowing out. But now I write for you, imaginary reader, so I censor myself and filter, once again.
I will tell you that I am struggling like the rest of you, if you halfway feel some of your emotions, for a sense of direction and how and where best to put my energies. I strive on to create a kind of quality of life that I long for. Am I there whereever there is? Not yet. I may not even know it when I get there, or, I may already be there.
That sacred union between pen and paper, that is even mightier than the sword, is taking root for me now. I am metaphor punch drunk, flowing along in a sea of iced green tea and granola. I have concerns. Do I move into the country, commute, and grow a garden. How quickly would I be sick of a long commute?
Certainly there is a chance of living closer to the city, where I work presently. The cities will become more difficult as the economy continues to deteriorate, and, barring some miracle...My friend said today, "There are already hungry and starving people in the cities."
Starving people in the cities? You betcha. Nobody campaigning on a promise to feed the people, to my knowledge.
It just seems like a good idea to learn how to grow things right now. There is a miniature drought on in New Orleans. If we don't get good rain this summer, we'll cook.
I want someone to talk plain and simple who's running. I like some of the Democratic candidates. I want to study Dean's record, but I don't like his idea to keep a bloated military. Kucinich is very direct in speech, and he stood up to the power company in Ohio and paid a political price. I like his seemingly ceaseless energy and willingness to tackle the roots of problems. "Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction," he recently said in Iowa.
The New York Times had scary stuff today, what with the youthful, far right, small army of neocons with their white t's with W's face on it, on the cover of the magazine that comes with the Sunday paper. I have to repeat to myself like a mantra right now, energetic progress in the good; focus, focus. So it goes.
I will tell you that I am struggling like the rest of you, if you halfway feel some of your emotions, for a sense of direction and how and where best to put my energies. I strive on to create a kind of quality of life that I long for. Am I there whereever there is? Not yet. I may not even know it when I get there, or, I may already be there.
That sacred union between pen and paper, that is even mightier than the sword, is taking root for me now. I am metaphor punch drunk, flowing along in a sea of iced green tea and granola. I have concerns. Do I move into the country, commute, and grow a garden. How quickly would I be sick of a long commute?
Certainly there is a chance of living closer to the city, where I work presently. The cities will become more difficult as the economy continues to deteriorate, and, barring some miracle...My friend said today, "There are already hungry and starving people in the cities."
Starving people in the cities? You betcha. Nobody campaigning on a promise to feed the people, to my knowledge.
It just seems like a good idea to learn how to grow things right now. There is a miniature drought on in New Orleans. If we don't get good rain this summer, we'll cook.
I want someone to talk plain and simple who's running. I like some of the Democratic candidates. I want to study Dean's record, but I don't like his idea to keep a bloated military. Kucinich is very direct in speech, and he stood up to the power company in Ohio and paid a political price. I like his seemingly ceaseless energy and willingness to tackle the roots of problems. "Poverty is a weapon of mass destruction," he recently said in Iowa.
The New York Times had scary stuff today, what with the youthful, far right, small army of neocons with their white t's with W's face on it, on the cover of the magazine that comes with the Sunday paper. I have to repeat to myself like a mantra right now, energetic progress in the good; focus, focus. So it goes.
# posted by scorpiorising : 5:07 PM |
Links
- Google News
- HOME
- Contact Me
- WAR CASUALTIES(MY OTHER BLOG)
- BAGHDAD BURNING
- UNQUALIFIED OFFERINGS
- JUAN COLE*INFORMED COMMENT*
- BRAD DELONG
- TOMPAINE.COM
- THE DAILY HOWLER
- DISSENT MAGAZINE
- CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY
- BLAH3.COM
- BLACK SUNDAE
- WAMPUM
- ESCHATON
- ARMS AND THE MAN
- MILL ON LIBERTY
- GERMANY IN WORLD WAR 2
- VEILED 4 ALLAH
- BUSY, BUSY, BUSY
- UNENVIABLE SITUATION
- HOW TO SAVE THE WORLD
- MATTHEW GROSS
- WHISKEY BAR
- WAR AND PIECE
- DAILY KOS
- GREG PALAST
- BLACK COMMENTATOR
- SURPRISING PATTERN OF FLORIDA'S ELECTION RESULTS
- THE BRAD BLOG
- THE OPEN VOTING CONSORTIUM
- BLACK BOX VOTING
- THE FREE PRESS
- VOTERGATE.TV
- STOLEN ELECTION. AMERICA HIJACKED
- An examination of the Florida election
- blueflu.us
- U.S. Election Controversies and Irregularities
- MY DD
- SEEING THE FOREST
- THERE IS NO CRISIS
- VELVET REVOLUTION
- 02/02/2003 - 02/09/2003
- 02/09/2003 - 02/16/2003
- 02/16/2003 - 02/23/2003
- 02/23/2003 - 03/02/2003
- 03/02/2003 - 03/09/2003
- 03/09/2003 - 03/16/2003
- 03/16/2003 - 03/23/2003
- 03/23/2003 - 03/30/2003
- 03/30/2003 - 04/06/2003
- 04/06/2003 - 04/13/2003
- 04/13/2003 - 04/20/2003
- 04/20/2003 - 04/27/2003
- 04/27/2003 - 05/04/2003
- 05/04/2003 - 05/11/2003
- 05/11/2003 - 05/18/2003
- 05/18/2003 - 05/25/2003
- 05/25/2003 - 06/01/2003
- 06/01/2003 - 06/08/2003
- 06/08/2003 - 06/15/2003
- 06/15/2003 - 06/22/2003
- 06/22/2003 - 06/29/2003
- 06/29/2003 - 07/06/2003
- 07/06/2003 - 07/13/2003
- 07/13/2003 - 07/20/2003
- 07/20/2003 - 07/27/2003
- 07/27/2003 - 08/03/2003
- 08/03/2003 - 08/10/2003
- 08/10/2003 - 08/17/2003
- 08/17/2003 - 08/24/2003
- 09/07/2003 - 09/14/2003
- 09/14/2003 - 09/21/2003
- 09/21/2003 - 09/28/2003
- 09/28/2003 - 10/05/2003
- 10/05/2003 - 10/12/2003
- 10/12/2003 - 10/19/2003
- 10/19/2003 - 10/26/2003
- 10/26/2003 - 11/02/2003
- 11/02/2003 - 11/09/2003
- 11/09/2003 - 11/16/2003
- 11/16/2003 - 11/23/2003
- 11/23/2003 - 11/30/2003
- 11/30/2003 - 12/07/2003
- 12/14/2003 - 12/21/2003
- 01/11/2004 - 01/18/2004
- 01/18/2004 - 01/25/2004
- 01/25/2004 - 02/01/2004
- 02/01/2004 - 02/08/2004
- 02/08/2004 - 02/15/2004
- 02/22/2004 - 02/29/2004
- 05/23/2004 - 05/30/2004
- 09/26/2004 - 10/03/2004
- 10/03/2004 - 10/10/2004
- 10/10/2004 - 10/17/2004
- 10/17/2004 - 10/24/2004
- 10/24/2004 - 10/31/2004
- 10/31/2004 - 11/07/2004
- 11/07/2004 - 11/14/2004
- 11/14/2004 - 11/21/2004
- 11/21/2004 - 11/28/2004
- 11/28/2004 - 12/05/2004
- 12/05/2004 - 12/12/2004
- 12/19/2004 - 12/26/2004
- 12/26/2004 - 01/02/2005
- 01/02/2005 - 01/09/2005
- 01/09/2005 - 01/16/2005
- 01/23/2005 - 01/30/2005
- 01/30/2005 - 02/06/2005
- 02/06/2005 - 02/13/2005
- 02/13/2005 - 02/20/2005
- 02/20/2005 - 02/27/2005
- 02/27/2005 - 03/06/2005
- 03/06/2005 - 03/13/2005
- 03/13/2005 - 03/20/2005
- 03/20/2005 - 03/27/2005
- 03/27/2005 - 04/03/2005
- 04/03/2005 - 04/10/2005
- 04/24/2005 - 05/01/2005
- 06/05/2005 - 06/12/2005
- 06/26/2005 - 07/03/2005
- 07/31/2005 - 08/07/2005
- 08/07/2005 - 08/14/2005
