CIA FED UP WITH BUSH AND AMATEURS AROUND HIM

[Guest guest]

Published: Monday, October 24, 2005

Bylined to: Arthur Shaw

 

 

CIA finally fed up with George W. Bush and the amateurs around him

 

VHeadline.com commentarist Arthur Shaw writes: In the shabby, sham,

and phony United States " democracy, " a controversy over the rule of

law rages although the US capitalist press falsely portrays the

controversy as a mere case of criminal law that affirms the rule of

law in the USA.

 

Of late, the US capitalist press closely covers developments in

Venezuela where the capitalist press portrays every alleged criminal

act by a high state officials ... especially alleged unlawful acts by

the Venezuelan President ... as something that impugns the rule of

law and destroys even the possibility of democracy because the rule

of law is a fundamental principle of democracy.

 

But the malignantly hypocritical and incurably forked-tongue US

capitalist media argues, in defense of the GOP dictatorship, that an

alleged criminal act by a high US official or officials, like Bush,

only invokes criminal law which affirms the rule of law and the

legitimacy of US democracy.

 

Duplicitous standards are, of course, characteristic of the current

regime in the USA which is only a so-called " democracy, " shabby,

sham, and phony.

 

The law, in what is called the Plame Affair, believed to have been

broken by a vicious pack of suspected imperialist authorities, which

include George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Karl Rove, and Lewis " Scooter "

Libby, all big shots in the imperialist regime, is the Intelligence

Identities Protection Act of 1982 which, in part, says:

 

" Whoever, having or having had authorized access to classified

information that identifies a covert agent, intentionally discloses

any information identifying such covert agent to any individual not

authorized to receive classified information, knowing that the

information disclosed so identifies such covert agent and that the

United States is taking affirmative measures to conceal such covert

agent's intelligence relationship to the United States, shall be

fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or

both. "

 

In other words, whoever blows the cover of an imperialist spy breaks

US law and imperialism is gonna get'cha.

 

The four imperialist authorities -- Bush, Cheney, Rove, Libby (and

perhaps others) -- are suspected of breaking this law by leaking the

identity of Valerie Plame Wilson as a CIA spy to a number of

reporters (some of whom may also be spies) of the US capitalist media.

 

The four imperialist authorities leaked on Mrs. Wilson because her

husband Joseph Wilson told the truth about Iraq not buying or trying

to buy uranium in Africa for a nuclear program before the March 2003

US aggression against the Iraqi people.

 

The four imperialist authorities wanted to use this lie -- Iraq

bought uranium to make weapons of mass destruction -- as an item in a

pack of lies as a pretext for the March 2003 US aggression against

Iraq. Finding the lie irresistible, the four authorities used this

lie anyway to justify US aggression against Iraq even after Joseph

Wilson proved to them it was a flat-out lie.

 

After the US aggression in March 2003, Joseph Wilson was very upset

and told the US capitalist media that imperialist authorities used

lies to justify their invasion of Iraq and their killing of the Iraqi

people.

 

Unlike some Americans, especially GOPs like Rush Limbaugh

and " reborn " Christians like Pat Robertson, Joseph Wilson believes

killing people on the basis of lies is wrong.

Enraged by the truthfulness of Wilson and by decision of the CIA to

pick someone who would tell the truth, the four imperialist

authorities revealed that Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Palme, was a

CIA spy, a revelation that inflicted and excited extreme anguish in

her and her employer and that gave joy to the four imperialist

authorities who had successfully leaked on or completely soaked her,

her husband, and her boss, the CIA.

 

In September 2003, the CIA demanded a Justice Department

investigation to find out who blew Mrs. Wilson's cover. Attorney

General John Ashcroft, claiming an undeniable conflict of interest,

immediately recused himself from the investigation and delegated the

investigative responsibility to Deputy Attorney General James Comey

who quickly saw he was being set up to take the fall. From September

to December of 2003, Deputy AG Comey searched for a way out of the

set up.

 

Then on December 30, 2003, Deputy AG Comey appointed Patrick

Fitzgerald as special counsel to conduct the investigation of the

leak.

 

Special Counsel Fitzgerald is near the end of his investigation and

is widely expected to seek indictments against Rove and Libby who are

both expendable patsies. The conventional wisdom is Bush and Cheney

will walk even though it is highly unlikely that Rove and Libby would

have leaked -- that is, launched a deliberate and concerted campaign

to discredit her and her husband as lying spies -- on Mrs. Wilson

without the knowledge and consent of their immediate supervisors,

Bush and Cheney, respectively.

 

Bush and Cheney will likely borrow the defense of their mutual friend

Ken Lay, former Enron CEO, " Nobody told me anything. "

 

Ideologically, the question is not whether this case, Plame Affair,

is either a criminal or a rule of law case, for clearly this case is

both a criminal and a rule of law case. The criminal side of the case

is obvious and that is unfortunately all that the US capitalist press

deals with. And lamentably most of the public discussion mimics the

coverage in the capitalist press.

 

The Plame Affair would be only a criminal case if the US government

normally upheld the rule of law when high government officials break

it. Under the Bush regime, this is not the case. The Plame affair is

a rule of law case because the US government does not normally uphold

the law against lawbreakers who are high officials of the state, like

Bush and Cheney. Bush and Cheney follow the law only when the law

happens to agree with the goals that the high officials are pursuing,

otherwise, they disregard law and view themselves as above the law.

 

Nothing here implies, of course, that the rule of law applies only to

the head of state and to other high officials. The rule of law

applies to everybody, including the head of state and other high

officials. Law is like death, it spares no one.

 

The rule of law does not imply that the law that rules is just or

unjust. The rule of law implies that the state upholds the law

whatever it merit or lack thereof with respect to justice. The rule

of law is law itself and the state must uphold it, for otherwise it

vanishes, and with it, the possibility of democracy, because the

notion that state exercises power in accordance with the rule of law

is a fundamental principle of democracy.

 

A fundamental principle, that is, almost everywhere but in the United

States under Bush dictatorship

The Bush regime has consistently and flagrantly disregarded the rule

of law and this case, involving the spy Valerie Plame Wilson, is just

another instance of its contempt for the rule of law. The rule of law

vanished from the United States in the beginning years of the Bush

regime and so did democracy.

 

Some of Bush's more flagrant violations include:

 

(1) George W. Bush and Richard Cheney disregarded the rule of law

since the day of the 2000 and 2004 US presidential elections when

they broke US and state election laws by rigging the vote. Free and

fair elections, like the rule of law, is also a fundamental principle

of democracy.

 

(2) Bush and Cheney disregarded, in 2001, the rule of law by

smuggling through the servile US legislature the patently

unconstitutional USA Patriot Act which lets the GOP dictator of the

United States confine people indefinitely without charge or trial or

counsel or notice to family and to the public,

 

(3) The two imperialist authorities have violated ...

horrendously ... the rule of law and basic decency when they

authorized the torture of POWs in violation of the Geneva Convention,

a US treaty, and in violation of the US Anti-Torture Act as well as

the US War Crimes Act, and

 

(4) The two imperialist bosses violated the rule of law when they

lied ... before the legislature and before the American people ...

the United States into war against Iraq.

 

These continuous and extreme violations of the law have resulted in

the deaths of hundreds of thousands of human beings ... genocide on

an enormous scale ... horrible and unspeakable crimes against

humanity ... so why is there suddenly all this noise about

imperialist bosses -- Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Libby -- violating the

law by outing some political queer from the spy closet? In other

words, why is this case being investigated and perhaps prosecuted and

the other cases which are thousand times more inhuman and unjust

virtually ignored?

 

Why is the state suddenly and finally upholding this law that

protects the anonymity of spies when the state does nothing to uphold

the numerous other laws which the Bush regime flagrantly and

regularly breaks?

 

The state, of course, upholds the law and affirms the rule of law by

the investigation and prosecution of the lawbreakers whoever they may

be.

 

The answer to the question of why is the state in the USA

investigating or perhaps prosecuting or otherwise upholding the law

in the Plame Affair, contrary to its manifest tendency in most other

cases, seems to be the special status of the victim of the alleged

criminal act in the Plame Affair.

 

In the alleged criminal acts of the Bush regime listed above, the

victims are only the American people whose individuals right are

under assault by the USA Patriot Act and " creative " law enforcement,

the US legislature which is reduced to two houses of cowards and

sycophants, US judiciary which rubber stamps the illegalities of the

Bush dictatorship, the Iraqi people who are innocent of the dirty US

lies about weapons of mass destruction, and thousands of the tragic

torture victims who are abducted and transported to US concentration

camps in Cuba, the Middle East, and in some of the former Soviet

Republics for indefinite confinement and for inhuman treatment.

 

These categories of people, including the American people, don't

really count with the US imperialists.

 

The imperialists believe they can trample on these " weak or servile "

categories of people with impunity and immunity.

In the Plame Affair, however, the victim is the Central Intelligence

Agency which is neither weak, servile nor cowardly, although it is

often sycophantic. Outing Valerie Plame Wilson victimizes the CIA

because the agency believes that the unauthorized disclosure of the

identity of its spies sets up CIA agents to get hit by individuals

connected to the countless assassination victims of the CIA. In the

old days, CIA assassination victims were mostly communists who were

silly enough to exposed themselves, but nowadays, the CIA is liable

to assassinate anybody and anybody is liable to have a grudge against

the agency.

 

So, unauthorized disclosure of the identity of its spies is a serious

matter with the agency.

 

The George W. Bush regime and the CIA never really hit it off even

though Bush's father was once the boss of the CIA. The Bush regime

independently privatized a number of the CIA's functions and

operations, subordinated the Agency to intelligence czar, and blamed

Bush regime's lies, when exposed and caught, on the agency as

intelligence failures. All of these measures and others angered the

spies in the CIA. Then the Bush regime blew the cover of a spy

because her husband refused to lie for Bush. The disclosure of the

spy shows the degree of contempt the Bush regime feels for the spies

who are not yet domesticated politically.

 

After the Plame disclosure, the CIA was finally fed up with Bush and

the amateurs around him and finally resolved to teach the conceited

GOP regime a good lesson.

 

To teach the Bush dictatorship a lesson, the first thing that CIA had

to do was to neutralize the US Attorney General John Ashcroft

(the " AG " ), the officially, at least, highest guardian of the rule of

law in the land. The GOP dictatorship cannot disregard the rule of

law unless the AG let's them and protects them. The AG has to be a

team player before the destruction of the rule of law is secure. As

long as the AG stood beside them, the four imperialist authorities

could leak on anybody. And they did. So, in September 2003, the CIA

came down on US Attorney General John Ashcroft like a ton of bricks.

Ashcroft quickly dumped the case on his deputy and the deputy quickly

dumped the case a special counsel whom the deputy appointed. The AG

showed disloyalty to the lawless Bush regime when he allowed the CIA

to neutralize him. The crooks in the Bush regime counted on Ashcroft

not to uphold the law and to block others from upholding it.

 

Naturally, the Bush regime quickly dumped the useless Ashcroft after

he was neutralized.

 

During the course of the Justice department investigation before the

appointment of Patrick Fitzgerald as special counsel, the CIA leaked

intelligence to the Justice Department investigators and to the

capitalist media. It became impossible for Deputy Attorney General

Comey to whitewash the case with the usual GOP lies and get the Bush

regime off the hook.

 

Why was the CIA successful in the neutralization of the powerful AG

and his deputy?

 

The Bush dictatorship represents only the right-wing of the US

bourgeoisie. But the CIA still represents, even after taking hard

blows from Bush, the whole US bourgeoisie of about 8 millionaires,

including its liberal wing which better known as a bunch of cowards.

By rigging the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, Bush

demonstrated that he can push around the whole US bourgeoisie. So,

it's bizarre that he doesn't seem to be able push around the CIA

which represents the whole US bourgeoisie, not just its right-wing.

Indeed, it appears that some key members of the hard-core right-wing

dictatorship under George W. Bush have already fled from the regime

and have ratted out Bush to the special counsel. Somehow, the wider

interests of the class of capitalists seems to have prevailed over

the narrower interests of a rightwing sector of the ruling class.

 

The CIA does not oppose the GOP dictatorship over the United States.

In general, the CIA seems to believe that a GOP dictatorship is good

for the US bourgeoisie. But the CIA seems to believe that Bush

overreaches when he tries to extend his dictatorship from over the

American people and from over the three branches of government to the

CIA. The CIA is an invisible state within a state and as such

possesses a kind of sovereignty, within limits, or separation of

powers, within limits, or autonomy, within limits. As far as

dictatorships in general are concerned, the CIA has nothing per se

against them. The CIA has overthrown a lot more democracies and

imposed a lot more dictatorships than the Bush regime which has

prevailed, in this regard, mainly in the United States in 2000 and

2004 and Haiti in 2004.

 

The key player in the Plame Affair is now the special counsel Patrick

Fitzgerald who may indict the small fry Rove and Libby and let the

big imperialist bosses Bush and Cheney walk. But Bush may not be

willing to throw the meat-laden Rove to the dogs because Rove knows

quite a bit. But Cheney wouldn't hesitate to throw " Scooter " to the

dogs. Cheney would be thrilled to throw " Scooter " Libby to the dogs.

And the dogs would be happy to have " Scooter.. "

 

If Bush and Cheney walk, the failure or the refusal to uphold the law

against the top GOP leaders demonstrates that rule of law has

vanished, and with it, US democracy has vanished.

 

What remains is what US Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia calls

the " cloak of legality " which is intended to fool everybody into

believing that the rule of law and democracy still exist.

 

If the special counsel doesn't indict Bush and Cheney, the three most

probable explanations of how the fix was done are

 

(1) the Bush and the CIA make a deal and CIA calls off the its dogs

or

 

(2) the AG or a panel of goose-stepping GOP judges dismisses the

special counsel or

 

(3) Bush makes a deal (or obstructs justice) with the special

counsel.

 

To attempt (3) or to buy the special counsel is extremely dangerous

for Bush. To do (2) or to fire the special counsel will provoke a

media and a bourgeois frenzy. Even sectors of the US bourgoisie will

suddenly begin to babble about the " rule of law. "

 

So, that leaves (1) or to make a deal with the CIA.

 

All that the CIA wants is to protect the CIA. As far as the CIA is

concerned, Bush can keep his slimy and lawless dictatorship over the

timid or intimidated American people.

 

One can argue that the Plame Affair does not attest in any way to a

rule of law problem in the USA, but the Affair goes only to the

inviolability of the CIA.

 

But this inviolability of the spies is enshrined in law and upholding

the law also and incidentally defends the inviolability. Plus,

unofficial and official inviolability of spies, like their official

cousins the diplomats, occupy a queer and weird and often nasty

relationship with the rule of law.

 

Fundamentally, spies feel they are above the law and the law must

serve spies, not vice versa.

 

The Bush regime has a similar attitude.

 

Clearly, the Plame Affair is more than a criminal case, such as the

O. J. Simpson and Robert Blake cases in LA. Contrary to the untruths

of the US capitalist media, the Plame Affair has important political

and ideological implications. After all, Simpson may have got only

two and Blake, only one.

 

But George W. Bush kills in the hundreds of thousands, although he

insists it's against the " law " to count Iraqi and Haitian casualties.

 

And if you go to Iraq or to Haiti and try to count the dead, you will

likely be killed by US forces or pro-US forces.

And you will not be the first enumerator to fall.

 

After all, the US people ... or, at least, the ruling GOPs ... don't

want to know how many Iraqis or how many Haitians or others whom

George W. Bush, the US monster, kills.

 

The number impugns the shabby, sham, and phony US " democracy " of

lawless GOP rulers and leaked-on US citizens.

 

Arthur Shaw

belial4444

 

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=46498