I want to know where the fire went. I want to know why we're letting them go ahead with Business As Usual, neo-con style.
Skeleton of child killed by El Salvadorian military, 1981.
What am I talking about? Impeachment of Bush and/or Cheney?
No.
I'm talking about the replacement of the reptile Donald Rumsfeld with the far-more-odious Robert Gates.
The photo above shows you just one of the many legacies of this rotten human being.
Are we gonna fight this, or did they buy us off with this election? I really want to know.
Because Robert Gates is a crook who should be sitting in jail, not about to step into one of the most important jobs in the United States, and the World.
Today we had the diary Gates Gate? -- Is Rummy's Replacement Even More Scandalous? by Paul Rosenberg. It's one of the best diaries I've seen on the subject of this Bush Toady Monster. 22 comments, including this one:
no one cares (2+ / 0-)
Dems have already signaled they won't fight this. None have the balls to look weak on terrorism. One or two will be allowed to make a speech and then another crooked SOB takes his seat.
If this is true, this is absolutely disgusting.
Why?
Because what good are the Democrats as a party if they won't oppose a known crook, a warmonger, a liar -- to head up the Department of Defense of the United States of America?
One of the worst offenses to be revealed as of late -- something that puts him EXACTLY in league with the criminality of the Rummys and the Cheneys and the other neo-cons:
The fucker wanted to bomb Nicaragua in 1984.
Records: Gates Advocated Nicaragua Airstrikes
Defense secretary nominee took stand while at CIA in '84
WASHINGTON | NOV. 24, 2006 -- In 1984, Robert Gates, then the No. 2 CIA official, advocated U.S. airstrikes against Nicaragua's pro-Cuban government to reverse what he described as an ineffective U.S. strategy to deal with communist advances in Central America, previously classified documents say.
Gates, President Bush's nominee to be defense secretary, said the United States could no longer justify what he described as "halfhearted" attempts to contain Nicaragua's Sandinista government, according to documents released Friday by the National Security Archive, a private research group.
In a memo to CIA Director William Casey dated Dec. 14, 1984, Gates said his proposed airstrikes would be designed "to destroy a considerable portion of Nicaragua's military buildup" and be focused on tanks and helicopters.
He also recommended that the United States prevent delivery to the Sandinistas of such weapons in the future. The administration, he said, should make clear that a U.S. invasion of the country was not contemplated.
Here are other crimes we know he's been involved in:
October Surprise
Team B Soviet Threat Analysis
Iran-Contra Treason
Iraqgate Treason
Murder Inc.
Spying on America
BCCI
I hardly know where to begin:
Bush administration’s Trojan Horse gift to America and the Democrats:
Former CIA Director and Iran-Contra insider Robert Gates
by Larry Chin
Global Research, November 9, 2006
With the Democrats and Democratic Party voters euphoric over a purported election victory, and a possible “change of course” in Iraq, the Bush administration quietly added poison to the Democrats’ celebration champagne by dredging up former CIA Director and Iran-Contra participant Robert Gates to replace Donald Rumsfeld as defense secretary.
The “war on terrorism” will not only continue, it will expand and deepen with Gates heading the Pentagon.
Who is Robert Gates?
Robert M. Gates was the CIA’s Deputy Director for Intelligence (DDI) from 1982 to 1986. He became CIA Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI) in 1986, and moved up to Acting Director of Central Intelligence (ADCI) that same year. In 1991, George H.W. Bush nominated Gates to head the CIA (as Langley’s DCI).
As a protégé of the infamous William Casey, and as both deputy director and director of the CIA, it goes without saying that Robert Gates was involved in every geopolitical crime and cover-up of the Reagan-Bush and George H.W. Bush era.
The encyclopedic list includes Iran-Contra, CIA narcotics trafficking, criminal covert operations, the infamous October Surprise, and the Bank of Credit and Commerce (BCCI) scandal.
Our own LondonYank posted an absolutely damning diary about Gates:
Robert Gates Promoted and Financed Osama Bin Laden
by LondonYank
Thu Nov 09, 2006 at 12:45:40 AM PST
Robert Gates made Osama Bin Laden what he is today. This is not exaggeration. By funding Osama Bin Laden's operations, training camps, weaponry and political influence from 1979 (even before Russia invaded Afghanistan), Robert Gates personally gave us our principal enemy in the "War on Terror".
More frighteningly, all of Robert Gates' support to Osama Bin Laden ran through Pakistan's ISI. ISI has been linked to training and funding the 9/11 bombers, the London bombers, the Madrid bombers, the Bali bombers and the Delhi bombers but is strangely immune from official Washington scrutiny.
I really wonder which side Robert Gates thinks he's on. With a 30 year history of pomoting and financing state and non-state terrorism, I doubt it is the side of the peace and prosperity of the American people and bringing our troops home safe.
One of the more damning bits from LondonYank's diary:
A RECIPE FOR COOKED INTELLIGENCE AND COVER-UPS
Melvin Goodman, a 20 year veteran of the CIA who testified against confirmation of Gates in 1991, writes in Foreign Policy in Focus:
In his memoirs, former secretary of state George Shultz demonstrated that CIA involvement in a policy of covert action tainted its intelligence. His memoirs remind us that when operations and analysis get mixed up, "the president gets bum dope." Shultz demonstrated how this happened in the 1980s in Afghanistan, Iran, and Pakistan, all contributign to the strife we face today in Southwest Asia. CIA director William Casey and his deputy Robert Gates covered up important intelligence regarding Pakistani nuclear developments in order to protect the covert action program supporting the mujahedeen in Afghanistan, and they exaggerated the role of the Stingers against Soviet forces in order to trumpet clandestine deliveries of surface-to-air weapons. When I challenged the operational director of the deliveries about providing weapons to the most reactionary members of the mujahedeen long after the Soviet withdrawal, he responded "we merely delivered the weapons to Pakistan and let God sort it out." This is the mentality that provided weapons and influence to Bin Laden and other anti-western fanatics.
This guy makes Rummy looks like a damn boyscout by comparison.
A man who is a hero to many here, Paul Wellstone, had this to say about Gates all the way back in 1991:
“Robert Gates became the Deputy Director of the CIA in April, 1986, after a meteoric rise in the Agency,” Wellstone said. “His confirmation hearings provided ample and credible evidence that, as the Deputy Director, he repeatedly skewed intelligence to promote the world view of his mentor and his boss, William Casey. Analysts specializing in the Soviet Union, Latin America, Africa, and scientific affairs, came forward--some at risk to their careers in the agency--to provide examples. The record further strongly suggests that Robert Gates supported--passively or actively--terribly misguided or illegal covert operations, including the diversion of funds to the Nicaraguan Contras obtained through the sale of arms to Iran. He also had a hand in hiding some of the details of these covert operations from Congress. Lastly, the record showed that Robert Gates crossed the line from independent intelligence-gathering into high-profile policymaking when he gave speeches advocating an unyielding line toward the Soviet Union and deployment of a star wars missile defense system.”
This article sums it up well:
Revisiting Iran-Contra: The Nomination of Robert Gates
November 10, 2006
Ivan Eland
Most of official Washington has long believed that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld needed to be sacked. Unfortunately it took a major Republican loss at the polls to finally prompt George W. Bush to cut loose a key player from his inner circle.
The removal of Rumsfeld signals that Bush is listening to the voters and elected officials. However, the nomination of Robert Gates—a Bush family crony and former Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) under his father’s administration—to replace Rumsfeld will only create new problems for the president.
President Ronald Reagan had to withdraw Gates’ nomination for DCI in 1987 because of Gates’ involvement in the Iran-Contra scandal. By 1991, after the heat had died down on the whole affair, President George H.W. Bush re-nominated Gates for the post, and he was confirmed.
Contrary to the conventional wisdom, the Iran-Contra affair was worse for the republic than the Watergate scandal. The Nixon administration’s illegal spying and dirty tricks on political opponents and misuse of law enforcement and intelligence agencies were bad. But the Reagan administration’s evasion of a congressional ban on assisting the Nicaraguan Contras (the Boland Amendment) was a knife in the heart of the greatest power the Congress has under the checks and balances of the Constitution—the power of the purse. Illegal activities get more media and law enforcement attention than unconstitutional actions, but the unconstitutional ones are, by far, the most harmful to the country.
SNIP...
Gates’ role in ignoring Congress’s specific ban on assisting the Contras—one of the most dangerous threats to constitutional government in American history—should not be dismissed as merely "old news." Apparently, the media and the Democrats are so relieved about getting rid of Rumsfeld that they appear to be doing just that. In a November 9, 2006 article, the Washington Post touted Gates’ extensive government experience, brilliance, bipartisanship, and pragmatic, consensus-building management style, but included only one sentence in Gates’ biography about his role in the Iran-Contra affair. The newspaper also cites praise for Gates from retired Senator Sam Nunn, the former chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, whose questions led to the withdrawal of the first Gates CIA nomination in 1987. The Post quoted Nunn as complimenting Gates’ “ability to work closely with Congress on a bipartisan basis,” and noted that he “has a well-deserved reputation on both sides of the aisle for competency and integrity.”
Integrity in the nation’s capital apparently includes looking the other way when unconstitutional acts are being committed—even when those actions threaten the balance of power between government branches and the decentralized system of governance which makes America unique.
The evidence is everywhere. Gates is one of the crookedest of the crooks, the insider's insider, his fingerprints are on everything from the conspiracy to unseat Jimmy Carter to the El Salvador massacres, to the Iran Contra debacle (with all its attendant illegalities including drug-running), a man who wanted to BOMB NICRAGUA for God's sake!
This nomination is INSULTING. To the Democratic Party, and to the counry.
We're supposed to sit back and let him be confirmed and NOT put up a big fight?
What does that say about us, if we don't fight him?
What does it say about our party if our party does not fight him?
What does it say about our country if we accept him?
The title of this diary is deliberately provocative. Because I see a Democratic Party that's a bit drugged with the sweet wine of victory, a Party that has slept in after the big win, a party that's still lounging in bed, sipping the coffee and wondering when they have to get back to work.
Well the work is here. It's time to quit hitting the snooze button and get back to fighting. Because, hell, it may wear you out, but it's all about fighting. It's no hyperbole to say this is a fight of good against evil, and you can't let that slide. The evil people don't slither away into the dark just because you won an election. They don't cry "Uncle", EVER.
So let's get off our asses and fight this goddamn crook.
Hello, freshly elected Democrats? Anybody listening?