Censored Foreign Policy Stories of 2005

from the book

Censored 2005

Project Censored

Seven Stories Press, 2004, paper

Updates of Censored Foreign Policy Stories of 2004

Haiti: The Untold Story

Conservative Talk Radio


Censored Foreign Policy Stories of 2005

Michael Chossudovsky writes in the Global Research newsletter about the coup in Haiti against Aristide in February 2004

The armed insurrection which contributed to unseating President Aristide on February 29, 2004, was the result of a carefully staged military-intelligence operation. The rebel paramilitary army crossed the border from the Dominican Republic in early February. It constitutes a well armed, trained, and equipped paramilitary unit integrated by former members of FRAPH, the "plain clothes" death squadrons, involved in mass killings of civilians and political assassinations during the CIA-sponsored 1991 military coup, which led to the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Aristide. During the military government (1991-1994), FRAPH was (unofficially) under the jurisdiction of the Armed Forces. According to a 1996 U.N. Human Rights Commission report, FRAPH had been supported by the CIA.

CBS anchor Dan Rather about reports on Bush's wars

It's an obscene comparison, but there was a time in South Africa when people would put flaming tires around people's necks if they dissented. In some ways, the fear is that you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tire of lack of patriotism put around your neck. It's that fear that keeps journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions / and to continue to bore in on the tough questions so often. gain, I'm t humbled to say I do not except myself from this criticism.




High Uranium Levels Found in Troops and Civilians

Civilian populations in Afghanistan and Iraq and occupying troops have been contaminated with astounding levels of radioactive depleted and non-depleted uranium as a result of post-9/1 1 United States' use of tons of uranium munitions. Researchers say surrounding countries are bound to feel the effects as well.

In 2003, scientists from the Uranium Medical Research Center (UMRC) studied urine samples of Afghan civilians and found that 100 percent of the samples taken had levels of non-depleted uranium (NDU) 400 percent to 2,000 percent higher than normal levels. The UMRC research team studied six sites, two in Kabul and others in the Jalalabad area. The civilians were tested four months after the attacks in Afghanistan by the United States and its allies.

NDU is more radioactive than depleted uranium (DU), which itself is charged with causing many cancers and severe birth defects in the Iraqi population-especially children-over the past 10 years. Four million pounds of radioactive uranium was dropped on Iraq in 2003 alone. Uranium dust will be in the bodies of our returning armed forces. Nine soldiers from the 442nd Military Police serving in Iraq were tested for DU contamination in December 2003. Conducted at the request of the Daily News, as the U.S. government considers the cost of $1,000 per affected soldier prohibitive, the test found that four of the nine men were contaminated with high levels of DU, likely caused by inhaling dust from depleted uranium shells fired by U.S. troops. Several of the men had traces of another uranium isotope, U-236, which is produced only in a nuclear reaction process.

Most American weapons (missiles, smart bombs, dumb bombs, bullets, tank shells, cruise missiles, etc.) contain high amounts of radioactive uranium. Depleted or non-depleted, these types of weapons, on detonation, release a radioactive dust which, when inhaled, goes into the body and stays there. It has a half-life of 4.5 billion years. Basically, it's a permanently available contaminant, distributed in the environment, where dust storms or any water nearby can disperse it. Once ingested, it releases subatomic particles that slice through DNA.

UMRC's field team found several hundred Afghan civilians with acute symptoms of radiation poisoning along with chronic symptoms of internal uranium contamination, including congenital problems in newborns. Local civilians reported large, dense dust clouds and smoke plumes rising from the point of impact, an acrid smell, followed by burning of the nasal passages, throat, and upper respiratory tract. Subjects in all locations presented identical symptom profiles and chronologies. The victims reported symptoms that included pain in the cervical column, upper shoulders, and basal area of the skull; lower back/kidney pain; joint and muscle weakness; sleeping difficulties; headaches; memory problems; and disorientation.

At the Uranium Weapons Conference held October 2003 in Hamburg, Germany, independent scientists from around the world testified to a huge increase in birth deformities and cancers wherever NDU and DU had been used. Professor Katsuma Yagasaki, a scientist at the Ryukyus University, Okinawa, calculated that the 800 tons of DU used in Afghanistan is the radioactive equivalent of 83,000 Nagasaki bombs. The amount of DU used in Iraq is equivalent to 250,000 Nagasaki bombs.

At the Uranium Weapons Conference, a demonstration by British-trained oncologist Dr. Jawad Al-Ali showed photographs of the kinds of birth deformities and tumors he had observed at the Saddam Teaching Hospital in Basra just before the 2003 war. Cancer rates had increased dramatically over the previous fifteen years. In 1989, there were 11 abnormalities per 100,000 births; in 2001, there were 116 per 100,000-an increase of over 1,000 percent. In 1989, 34 people died of cancer; in 2001, there were 603 cancer deaths. The 2003 war has increased these figures exponentially.

At a meeting of the International Criminal Tribunal for Afghanistan held in December of 2003 in Tokyo, the U.S. was indicted for multiple war crimes in Afghanistan, among them the use of DU. Leuren Moret, president of Scientists for Indigenous People and environmental commissioner for the city of Berkeley, testified that because radioactive contaminants from uranium weapons travel through air, water, and food sources, the effects of U.S. deployment in Afghanistan will be felt in Iran, Pakistan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, China, and India. Countries affected by the use of uranium weapons in Iraq include Saudi Arabia, Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel, Turkey, and Iran.


The Destabilization of Haiti

On February 29, 2004, President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was forced into exile by American military. While the Bush Administration and the corporate press implied that Aristide left willingly, Aristide was able to give a detailed account of his kidnapping by the American military to a Haitian journalist in the United States via cell phone, who in turn, broadcast his speech on Pacifica Radio's Flashpoints on KPFA. While the U.S. was forced to acknowledge the kidnapping allegations, they were quick to discredit them and deny responsibility. The circumstances underlying the current situation in Haiti, as well as the history of U.S. involvement, is being ignored by U.S. officials and mainstream media.

In 1990, after the brutal 15-year rule of dictator "Baby Doc" Duvalier, 70 percent of Haiti's people voted for Aristide in their first democratic election. During his first term, Aristide began to make good on his populist platform, revising the tax code to require import fees and income-based taxation on the rich and pressing for an increase in the minimum wage. He was, however, soon under pressure from International Financial Institutions (IFIs) and the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to reverse these proposals. A few months later, Aristide was overthrown by the rebel paramilitary army known as the Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti (FRAPH). FRAPH had been trained and sponsored by the CIA. In fact, several FRAPH leaders were on the CIA payroll.

During the coup period, from 1991-1994, Aristide's 1990 presidential opponent, former World Bank official Marc Bazin, was appointed prime minister by the military junta, and the exploitation and terrorization of the country continued as it had during the Duvalier period. Under Bazin, 4,000 civilians were executed, and more than 60,000 refugees fled. It was in this context of CIA-supported FRAPH killings that Bazin became a poster boy for World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and Washington Consensus policies.

With the help of the Clinton Administration, Aristide returned to his position as president of Haiti in 1994. His return was conditional, based on his support of IMF and World Bank proposals implemented during his years in exile. During that time, Haiti had racked up huge amounts of external debt and was forced to turn to the IMF and World Bank for loans. In response, the IMF formed the "Economic Recovery Program." Supposedly intended to help Haiti get back on its feet, the program instead imposed a budget reform program that reduced the size of Haiti's civil service and ultimately led to the collapse of Haiti's state system. Aristide served until the end of his presidential term in 1996.

Aristide was reelected in Haiti's 2000 presidential elections, the same year that George W. Bush entered office. Aristide won with 92 percent of the vote in an election declared free and fair by the Organization of American States (OAS), of which the U.S. is a member. However, shortly after Bush's own tainted election, his administration questioned the election of seven senators from Aristide's Fanmi Lavalas party. Despite the resignation of the senators, the Bush Administration used these inflated allegations to justify the withdrawal of $512 million in InterAmerican Development Bank loans to Haiti. The Administration pressured the World Bank, the IMF, and the European Union to follow with reduction of other planned assistance.

While obstructing aid and loans, the U.S. spent millions to fund the "Democratic Platform of Civil Society Organizations and Opposition Political Parties." The Democratic Platform, developed by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and funded by the International Republican Institute, combines the "Democratic Convergence" (DC) and "The Group of 184 Civil Society Organizations" (G-184) in

opposition to the Aristide's government. The DC consists of 200 small political organizations ranging from Maoists to free-market liberals and ultra-right-wing Duvalierists, who refuse participation in electoral processes and who are responsible for violent attacks on the Haitian government. The G-184 is a group of civil society organizations headed by Andre Apaid, U.S. citizen and owner of Alpha Industries, one of Haiti's largest cheap labor exporters producing for a number of U.S. firms including IBM, Sperry/Unisys, Remington, and Honeywell.

Following the forced removal of Aristide, the National Liberation and Reconstruction Front, the new paramilitary group comprised of former FRAPH members, is now collaborating with the Democratic Platform in the form of neoliberal structural adjustment. Their intent is to assist "civilian" political parties and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) with the installation of American style democracy/corporate domination. Incidentally, NED also provided funds to the "Democratic Coordination," another "civil society organization" based in Venezuela, which initiated the attempted coup against President Hugo Chavez.

These opposition groups, funded, trained, and supplied by U.S. forces, are waging a Contra-style war against Haiti. The new government, led by Interim Prime Minister Gerard Latortue, is made up of human rights criminals, drug dealers, and thugs involved in the 1990 and 2004 insurrections. A consistent and systematic campaign of terror and violence is being carried out by the likes of Guy Philippe, Louis Jodel Chamblain, and Jean Tatoune. Philippe, a drug dealer and former police chief, plucked from the Haitian army to be specially trained by U.S. forces in Ecuador, organized the Haitian opposition from the Dominican Republic where he was required to check in with the CIA two to three times a month. Chamblain, former number-two man in FRAPH, sentenced twice for murder and convicted in the 1994 Raboteau massacre and in the 1993 assassination of democracy-activist Antoine Izmery, joins Philippe to lead seminars on "democratic" opposition with machine guns slung over their shoulders. Tatoune, another FRAPH leader also convicted of massacre in Raboteau and identified by victims as having shot several civilians, arrived in an U.S. helicopter to stand next to the de facto prime minister as a "freedom fighter."

While Haiti's economy was bankrupted by IMF reforms, the narcotics transshipment trade still thrives. As the hub of Caribbean drug traffic, important in the transport of cocaine from Colombia to the U.S., Haiti is responsible for an estimated 14 percent of all cocaine entering the U.S. The CIA protected this trade during the Duvalier era as well as during the military dictatorship of 1991-1994. The money from the drug transshipment trade flows out of Haiti to criminal intermediaries in the wholesale and retail trade, to the intelligence agencies, which protect the trade, and to the financial and banking institutions where the proceeds are laundered. Wall Street and European banks have a vested interest in installing "democracy" in order to protect investment in Haiti's transshipment trade routes.

Since Bush Sr.'s presidency, the U.S. has worked hard to forge an opposition against Aristide and his administration. This opposition has been fueled by Aristide's refusal to privatize Haiti's public enterprises and his increase of the minimum wage. When Aristide returned to Haiti in 1994, U.S. officials expected that many of its public enterprises (the telephone company, electrical company, airport, port, three banks, a cement factory, and a flour mill) would be sold to private corporations, preferably U.S. multinationals working in partnership with the Haitian elite. Aristide refused, prompting the withdrawal of $500 million in promised international aid. In February 2003, Aristide moved, again against strong opposition from the business sector, to double the minimum wage. This increase affected more than 20,000 assembly line workers contracted by corporations such as Disney and Wal-Mart.

Haiti's government worked for alternatives to neoliberal development, corporate domination, and essentially U.S. hegemony, joining with the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) to form a trade bloc against the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and other initiatives. They established cooperative projects with Venezuela and Cuba, securing regular shipments of oil from Venezuela at very reduced prices and substantial medical assistance from Cuba. CARICOM has called for an investigation into the abduction of President Aristide, and President Hugo Chavez has offered Aristide asylum in Venezuela. After two weeks exile in the Central African Republic, Aristide has been granted temporary asylum in Jamaica, only about 130 miles from Haiti.



Media and Government Ignore Dwindling Oil Supplies

If the former industry executives, geologists, and statisticians in the Association for the Study of Peak Oil (ASPO) are correct, oil may have already reached its highest levels of production potential. But U.S. leaders and the mainstream media refuse to acknowledge that we are headed for an inevitable oil crisis with extreme consequences sure to impact every aspect of our lives. As the peak is reached, oil prices will start to rise (as they have every year since 2000). As the oil decline accelerates, prices will rise even faster.

The problem is that our lives have become hard-wired to the oil economy. Oil powers the machinery of modern society and lubricates its engines. Materials need to be transported, and companies need working people to make them. Workers in turn need to run a car, pay for electricity to heat their house, and buy food (that is packaged in plastic). High transportation prices mean high food prices. Oil is the main ingredient in plastics and polyester: the clothes we wear, the carpets we walk on, the frames for our computers, the seats we sit on, the bottles we drink from, and the band-aids that salve our wounds. Who will be able to afford them as the price of oil starts to rise? What will replace them? This story isn't about the end of oil as it is often portrayed; it is the beginning of the end of oil. But this still means a paradigmatic shift at a level not seen since the Industrial Revolution.

Our government has yet to begin diversifying our energy. Head of the energy investment bank Simmons & Co. International, Matthew Simmons said, "I am an advisor to the Bush Administration-although I'm not sure they are listening. What I basically told them is that we had some looming energy problems: that we were barreling into a really nasty energy crisis. We need a new energy." But a viable alternative has yet to be developed. These economic problems will be exacerbated by the direct connection between the price of oil and the rate of unemployment. The last five recessions in the U.S. were all preceded by a rise in the oil price.

Alternative energy, such as hydrogen, which President Bush mentioned in his State of the Union speech in January of 2004, has its own complexities and system requirements. Hydrogen, natural gas, biodiesel, and nuclear energy sources are all considered alternative fuels. Wind and solar power are considered renewable energy resources. The viability of these options depends directly on how we plan to implement them.

The only rational response to both the impending end of the oil age and the menace of global warming is to redesign our cities, our farming, and our lives. But this will not happen without massive political pressure, and our problem is that no one ever rioted for austerity. People tend to take to the streets because they want to consume more, not less.



Forcing a World Market for GMOs

The Bush Administration, backed by the biotech industry, intends to force the European Union (EU) to drop trade barriers against genetically modified organisms (GM Os). Their claim is that such a trade barrier is illegal under World Trade Organization (WTO) rules and that the distribution of GMOs is a necessary part of the campaign to end world hunger. However, the reason behind U.S. governmental support for GMOs may have more to do with heavy lobbying, campaign contributions, and the close relationships between government agencies and biotech companies than actual science and the war against hunger. U.S. industry loses some $300 million a year of possible GMO exports to the EU. Biotechnology promoters like Monsanto and agri-business have strenuously lobbied the administration to bring a formal WTO case against the EU while suppressing studies that show GMOs may have adverse effects on health and the environment.

The connections between biotech companies and U.S. regulatory agencies are deep. According to <globalinfo.org>, Ann Veneman, U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary, used to serve on the board of Calgene, the company that brought us the biotech tomato. She also used to head Agracetus, a subsidiary of Monsanto. In another example of the "revolving door" between biotech companies and regulatory agencies, the person who wrote the GMO regulations for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was a lawyer who "previously" represented biotech giant Monsanto. After writing the FDA legislation, the lawyer returned to work for Monsanto.

Another factor that has powerfully influenced the growth of the GMO industry throughout the world is the link between international development organizations (such as the World Bank) and the biotech industry. Under an approved "staff exchange program" the World Bank trades its employees with employees from companies like Dow, ARD, and Aventis. There are also exchanges with academic institutions, governments, and UN development agencies. One startling example involves Eija Pehu, a senior scientist with the World Bank's department of agriculture and rural development. The former president of a Finnish biotech company, Pehu is also listed as a board member for the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), an influential lobbying organization whose funding comes from companies like Monsanto, Syngenta, and Bayer. The ISAAA's objective is "the transfer and delivery of appropriate biotechnology applications to developing countries." They have successfully pursued this program with projects in at least 12 developing nations.

The U.S. has a history of attempting to push GMOs on developing nations through the use of food aid. Yet, despite enormous pressure and Washington PR campaigns, Zambia, Zimbabwe, and Mozambique have turned down shipments of U.S. GMO aid because of health and environmental concerns. Ronnie Cummins, national director of Organic Consumers, says the real aim of the United States is to frighten poor developing nations into complying and opening their markets for controversial products. But while GMO companies continue to open new markets abroad, the jury is still out on whether or not their products are likely to provide any real benefits. Controversy and scandal surround the biotech industry and charges that it manipulates the results of research performed on GMOs. Biotech companies create relationships with universities that conduct research on their products by providing sorely needed funding for university research departments. (Over the last three decades, funding provided to U.S. universities by the industrial sector grew faster than any other source.) Researchers who have come forward with evidence showing that GMOs can be harmful claim they have experienced pressure from university research alliances to alter results. Some assert that the priorities of private sponsors influence what should have been impartial findings. One researcher who found less than desirable results, and discussed them publicly, had the misfortune of being blacklisted and the target of a powerful GMO PR campaign to discredit his work. In 1998, Arpad Pusztai, a scientist at the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland discovered that genetically modified potatoes caused inflammations and tumors in the lining of stomachs of lab rodents. After publishing his story, his home was burglarized, his research was stolen, he lost his job at Rowett after 30 years of employment, and he was maligned by the Royal Medical Society (after his research was published in the reputable scientific journal Lancet). This story was Censored #7 in 2001.

The European Union denies that it has enacted a trade moratorium and says it simply needed more time to develop systems for tracing and labeling GM foods and feed. However, even if the EU were to abide by the WTO's rules, "there is no way in hell they can force the European consumers, supermarkets, or farmers to stock GMO tainted crops," says Ronnie Cummins.

Meanwhile, the anti-GMO movement in the United States is rapidly gaining steam. In March 2004, Mendocino, California became the first county in the U.S. to ban the growing of genetically modified crops and animals.



Brazil Holds Back in FTAA Talks, But Provides Little Comfort for / the Poor of South America

The Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) could become the biggest trading block in history, expanding NAFTA to 34 countries from Canada to the bottom of South America. This deal is unlikely to meet its January 2005 deadline, now that the second largest player in the negotiations, Brazil, is holding back. Brazil played an important part in the November 2003 Cancun WTO meeting. Led by President Lula, a 20-country coalition that opposed the agenda of the northern countries caused the meeting to end abruptly and collapse.

The United States has reacted swiftly by making bilateral agreements with individual Central and South American countries and threatening to restrict their access to U.S. markets if they refuse to cooperate. In many cases, these poorer countries have no choice but to agree to the very strict and unfair agreements that the United States demands. Countries such as Peru, Panama, the Dominican Republic, Colombia, Ecuador, and many other Central American nations involved in the FTAA want access to U.S. markets, even if it means relaxing antitrust laws and workers' rights. This tactic of coercing countries one by one has, so far, been successful in isolating Brazil from building coalitions with neighboring countries. Brazil is the fifth largest nation in the world, both in size and population. Boasting a consumer market of 182 million people, the United States desperately wants in.

Luiz Inacio "Lula" da Silva, the president of Brazil, has taken a very anti-Washington stance in the recent talks on the FTAA. All 34 countries had demands put upon them in a two-tier system. Because the United States and Brazil both sit comfortably in the top tier, they are able to opt out of any negotiations not favorable to them. This has allowed the United States to keep its farm subsidies, which is the only way the U.S. sugar industry can compete with the largest sugar exporter in the world, Brazil. In return, Brazil is not obligated to open up any of its service industry and government contracts to foreign competition.

Because NAFTA did little to stop jobs in Mexico from going overseas, particularly to China, where wages and operating costs are even cheaper than Mexico, Brazilian politicians are very hesitant to sign up for Washington's latest economic plan. A poll by the University of Miami indicated that 76 percent of Latin American business people, journalists, academics, and government officials believe that the FTAA plan would benefit the United States and not Brazil. This is one reason President Lula is staying away from the VI'AA and bolstering talks abroad with India and China that focus on technology and natural resources.


Reinstating the Draft

The Selective Service System (SSS), the Bush Administration, and the Pentagon have been quietly moving to fill draft board vacancies nationwide in order to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. In preparation, several million dollars have been added to the 2004 SSS budget. The SSS Administration must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. The Pentagon has quietly begun a public campaign to fill all 10,350 draft board positions and 11,070 appeals board slots nationwide. An unpopular election year topic, military experts and influential members of Congress are suggesting that if Rumsfeld's prediction of a "long, hard slog" in Iraq and Afghanistan (and a permanent state of war on terrorism) proves accurate, the U.S. may have no choice but to draft.

Congress brought twin bills 5. 89 and H.R. 163 forward in 2003, introduced by Representative Charles Rangel (D-NY) and Senator Fritz Hollings (D-SQ. Entitled the Universal National Service Act of 2003, their aim is "to provide for the common defense by requiring that all young persons (age 18-26) in the United States, including women, perform a period of military service or a period of civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, and for other purposes." These active bills currently sit in the Committee on Armed Services.

Dodging the draft will be more difficult than those from the Vietnam era remember. College and Canada will no longer be options. In December 2001, Canada and the U.S. signed a "Smart Border Declaration," which could be used to contain would-be draft dodgers. The declaration involves a 30-point plan that implements, among other things, a "pre-clearance agreement" of people entering and departing each country. Reforms aimed at making the draft more equitable along gender and class lines also eliminate higher education as a shelter. Underclassmen would only be able to postpone service until the end of their current semester. Seniors would have until the end of the academic year.

In May 2000, Delaware was the first state to enact legislation requiring that driver's license information be sent to the SSS. By August 2003, 32 states, two territories, and the District of Columbia followed suit. Noncompliance with sending information to the SSS has always been punishable by up to five years in prison and a $250,000 fine. Up to now, the government has never acted on these measures, but levied punishment would bar violators from federal employment and student loans. The SSS has altered its Web site at <www.sss.gov> to include a front-page denial of a draft resurrection, but continues to post the twenty-four page Annual Performance Plan, which includes its June 15 deadline still intact.

In addition to the possibility of a draft, the continual recruitment of Latinos into the armed forces has been creating volatile reactions from antirecruitment advocates. The target recruitment of Latinos began during Clinton's tenure in office. Louis Caldera, then secretary of the army, was able to discern that Latinos were the fastest growing group of military-age individuals in the United States. In May of 2003, the military was involved in a diplomatic dispute when recruiters made their way across the border. The headmaster of a Tijuana high school threw out the recruiter, and the Mexican government was vehemently upset. The Pentagon has preyed on the fact that Latinos and Latinas often enter the military in search of "civilian skills" they can apply in the workforce.

In 2001, Department of Defense (DOD) statistics showed that while 10 percent of military forces are comprised of Latinos, 17.7 percent of this group occupies "frontline positions." This includes "infantry, gun crews, and seamanship." With the army's continual banter about educational subsidies of up to $30,000 for college and completion of GED requirements, the "glitz and glamour" of the military has enhanced misconceptions about the nature of military service for Latinos.

Charles Pena, director of defense studies at the libertarian Cato Institute presents a comparable conflict between the United States and the Middle East and the British and Northern Ireland where the occupying army encountered hostile opposition amongst civilian populations. In that situation, the occupying army needed a ratio of 10 or 20 soldiers per 1,000 civilians; "...If you transfer that to Iraq, it would mean you'd need at least 240,000 troops and maybe as many as 480,000." With no sign of retreat or resolution and every indication of increasing opposition in locations occupied by troops, it will likely be deemed necessary to increase and maintain military presence. Additionally, there is the massive exodus of ally troops and aid from positions of occupation and combat. The U.S. has been unable to draw major assistance from other countries, and high enlistment bonuses have been both ineffective and expensive in light of rapidly growing debt. Add to the growing list of unfavorable realities an unwillingness of soldiers to re-enlist, and the U.S. is unable to meet the soldier quotient needed to continue occupation of Iraq alone. Exacerbating this dilemma is the probability of expanding occupation and the White House promise of war in Multiple theaters.

Project Censored page

Index of Website

Home Page