Massachusetts voters aren�t too fond of either of the politicians in their midst considering a run for president in 2008.
Associated Press exit polling shows that Democratic Senator John Kerry fared just as badly as Republican Governor Mitt Romney.
Kerry lost the 2004 presidential election and Romney is considering a run in two years.
About two-thirds of voters surveyed yesterday in Massachusetts said neither man should succeed President Bush, who is halfway through his last term.
Nearly half of voters surveyed identified themselves as Democrats.
The voters who said Kerry would not make a good president voted about evenly for Massachusetts Governor-elect Deval Patrick and Republican Kerry Healey.
Voters who said Romney would not make a good president overwhelmingly supported Patrick.
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Troops use blogs to soldier on, sound off on election
American troops stationed abroad are sounding off this Veterans Day about the nation�s political upheaval while still pondering what can be done to win the peace in Iraq.
�Stand by for tax hikes. The prominent Dems have already stated that they will repeal Bush�s tax cuts, claiming that they only benefit the rich. I guess I must be rich. Who knew that the military paid so well?� writes an anonymous Marine gunnery sergeant stationed in Okinawa on his blog, Jarhead�s Firing Range.
Veterans Day falls just two days after Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld resigned, placing American troops under the leadership of an outgoing commander at a time of war. Troops, though, say his departure and the ensuing shake-up at the very highest levels of their command is having little effect on troops on the ground.
Spc. Wayne Thimas, a 32-year-old Hub soldier with the 1st Battalion, 17th Infantry, 172 Stryker Brigade Combat Team, said Rumsfeld�s departure means nothing to him.
�It�s kinda weird, but this is just another day for us. Nothing changes here. You hear explosions and gunshots, you feel the explosions, and you don�t even flinch - it�s just another day in Baghdad,� Thimas said.
Some military bloggers hope the voters have gotten their frustration with Iraq out of their systems.
�Bottom line? I see less whining and more calls for action,� writes Air Force Lt. John Oberle on his blog, Nettle in My Hand. �That is a good thing. What remains to be seen is if this election can be reversed in two years. In the meantime, we have to focus on the best way not to lose the War on Terror and prevent the country from a liberal backslide. This may be bitter medicine, but it could be effective in providing a trial by fire for the conservative movement in this great country.�
Or as the Okinawa Marine puts it:
�Stand by for tax hikes. The prominent Dems have already stated that they will repeal Bush�s tax cuts, claiming that they only benefit the rich. I guess I must be rich. Who knew that the military paid so well?� writes an anonymous Marine gunnery sergeant stationed in Okinawa on his blog, Jarhead�s Firing Range.
Veterans Day falls just two days after Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld resigned, placing American troops under the leadership of an outgoing commander at a time of war. Troops, though, say his departure and the ensuing shake-up at the very highest levels of their command is having little effect on troops on the ground.
Spc. Wayne Thimas, a 32-year-old Hub soldier with the 1st Battalion, 17th Infantry, 172 Stryker Brigade Combat Team, said Rumsfeld�s departure means nothing to him.
�It�s kinda weird, but this is just another day for us. Nothing changes here. You hear explosions and gunshots, you feel the explosions, and you don�t even flinch - it�s just another day in Baghdad,� Thimas said.
Some military bloggers hope the voters have gotten their frustration with Iraq out of their systems.
�Bottom line? I see less whining and more calls for action,� writes Air Force Lt. John Oberle on his blog, Nettle in My Hand. �That is a good thing. What remains to be seen is if this election can be reversed in two years. In the meantime, we have to focus on the best way not to lose the War on Terror and prevent the country from a liberal backslide. This may be bitter medicine, but it could be effective in providing a trial by fire for the conservative movement in this great country.�
Or as the Okinawa Marine puts it:
�All I really have to say on this matter is this: �Enjoy your bliss American voters. You made your bed by voting in the dummycrats, now you get to sleep in it.� �
Happy Birthday to the USMC: November 10, 1775
Tribute to our GREAT MARINES!
Our Nation Pays Tribute on Veterans Day
On This Veteran's day I would like to thank all Veterans, past and present for a job well done. Thank you for your bravery and dedication performing your duties. Because of each and every one of you America is free.
Our Nation Pays Tribute on Veterans Day
On This Veteran's day I would like to thank all Veterans, past and present for a job well done. Thank you for your bravery and dedication performing your duties. Because of each and every one of you America is free.
Friday, November 10, 2006
Democrats Now Have a "Mandate" -- But 1994 GOP Didn't?
Reporter Adam Nagourney, on audio clip, gets a bit excited about Democratic prospects Wednesday morning: "Twenty-five votes is a lot of votes and that's what it is right now, it could be more by the time we finish counting. And that's a large margin. And, first of all, that means the Democratic Party can clearly claim a mandate and their party leaders will have a lot of flexibility in trying to build coalitions to get stuff through."
A Nexis search indicates that the Times failed to find a Republican "mandate" in the week after the GOP gained 54 House seats in 1994 -- yet Nagourney sees a clear mandate for Democrats in a 25-seat gain in 2006.
A Nexis search indicates that the Times failed to find a Republican "mandate" in the week after the GOP gained 54 House seats in 1994 -- yet Nagourney sees a clear mandate for Democrats in a 25-seat gain in 2006.
Some soldiers glad to see Rumsfeld go; some are not
While Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld will step down � and former CIA director Robert Gates will replace him, not all soldiers are pleased with the news.
A surprised Sgt. Jeff Brazier said he thought it was �a bad decision.�
�I�m disappointed,� the 31-year-old soldier stationed at Fort Benning, Ga., said Wednesday. �I didn�t have any problems with Rumsfeld.�
A soldier with the 29th Infantry Regiment at Benning, Brazier said he thinks the decision is a �response to political pressure and not a response to how well [Rumsfeld] has done his job.�
�This is a direct reflection of the polls.�
Before being assigned to the 29th, Brazier deployed to Iraq in 2003 with the 101st Airborne Division out of Fort Campbell, Ky. He said he hopes the decision to replace Rumsfeld won�t lead to the U.S. military leaving Iraq prematurely.
�This does not affect our efforts to carry on with the war,� said Army spokesman Paul Boyce in Washington. �We have a great deal of respect for Mr. Rumsfeld.�
�You just continue in a thorough manner to make certain the troops are cared for and provided for."
�For us, the civilians and soldiers, it�s fantastic news,� said Spc. Jason Hartley, of the New York National Guard�s 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry Regiment. �You couldn�t do much worse than the way things are going now in Iraq.�
A senior active-duty officer in Washington, D.C., agreed, calling Rumsfeld�s resignation �a good move. With all these generals coming out against him and all, it was probably time for him to go.� The officer, who declined to be identified, recently returned from a year in Ramadi, and added that �It�s pretty bad over there.�
The Gates choice, said Spc. Harley, is �not a horrible one. This at least seems like a rational nomination,� said Harley, who spent most of 2004 in Iraq.
�At first glance I can�t think of anything majorly wrong about what we�d want to know about this guy.�
The sergeant agreed. �I�m sure the administration will choose someone else that is qualified to do the job,� Benning�s Brazier said. �But I am concerned that this will be the beginning of something where they will buckle under the pressure and be tempted to look for an easy way out of Iraq,� Brazier said. �The easy path is not going to be the right one to take in this situation.�
A surprised Sgt. Jeff Brazier said he thought it was �a bad decision.�
�I�m disappointed,� the 31-year-old soldier stationed at Fort Benning, Ga., said Wednesday. �I didn�t have any problems with Rumsfeld.�
A soldier with the 29th Infantry Regiment at Benning, Brazier said he thinks the decision is a �response to political pressure and not a response to how well [Rumsfeld] has done his job.�
�This is a direct reflection of the polls.�
Before being assigned to the 29th, Brazier deployed to Iraq in 2003 with the 101st Airborne Division out of Fort Campbell, Ky. He said he hopes the decision to replace Rumsfeld won�t lead to the U.S. military leaving Iraq prematurely.
�This does not affect our efforts to carry on with the war,� said Army spokesman Paul Boyce in Washington. �We have a great deal of respect for Mr. Rumsfeld.�
�You just continue in a thorough manner to make certain the troops are cared for and provided for."
�For us, the civilians and soldiers, it�s fantastic news,� said Spc. Jason Hartley, of the New York National Guard�s 1st Battalion, 69th Infantry Regiment. �You couldn�t do much worse than the way things are going now in Iraq.�
A senior active-duty officer in Washington, D.C., agreed, calling Rumsfeld�s resignation �a good move. With all these generals coming out against him and all, it was probably time for him to go.� The officer, who declined to be identified, recently returned from a year in Ramadi, and added that �It�s pretty bad over there.�
The Gates choice, said Spc. Harley, is �not a horrible one. This at least seems like a rational nomination,� said Harley, who spent most of 2004 in Iraq.
�At first glance I can�t think of anything majorly wrong about what we�d want to know about this guy.�
The sergeant agreed. �I�m sure the administration will choose someone else that is qualified to do the job,� Benning�s Brazier said. �But I am concerned that this will be the beginning of something where they will buckle under the pressure and be tempted to look for an easy way out of Iraq,� Brazier said. �The easy path is not going to be the right one to take in this situation.�
Monday, November 06, 2006
Vote Against the Mainstream Media
A new study by the non-partisan Center for Media and Public Affairs in Washington, D.C., analyzed midterm election coverage on the ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts between September 5 and October 22. The study found during these seven key weeks following Labor Day, 167 such stories were broadcast. These big three network gave Democratic candidates coverage that was 77 percent positive. Republican candidates got the opposite � coverage that was 88 percent negative.
A 2005 University of California Los Angeles-led study found that 18 of the nation's top 20 media outlets skewed their news coverage significantly to the Left.
"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said UCLA political scientist Tim Groseclose, the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."
The liberal media beginning last Friday has been touting an editorial in the military careerist-oriented Army Times, sister publication of the Military Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Times, calling for the resignation of President George W. Bush's Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
The news stories about this seem orchestrated to persuade voters that America's military is turning against the Bush Iraq policy. Unreported, however, is that these are not military-edited publications. They are owned, edited and written by Gannett, the same liberal company that publishes USA Today, a left-of-center newspaper according to the UCLA-led study.
Last Friday Vanity Fair Magazine made news with a press release quoting several neo-conservative Bush advisors. Their quotes, from its forthcoming January issue, suggest that Bush Iraq policy was mistaken and has failed.
Several of those quoted � Richard Pearle, David Frum, Eliot A. Cohen and Michael Rubin � wrote over the weekend in National Review that their words were deceptively edited and distorted. ""Vanity Fair�set my words in its own context in its press release," wrote Frum. "They added words outside the quote marks to change the plain meaning of quotations."
ABC's Political Director Mark Halperin acknowledges that 70 percent of his ABC colleagues have a pro-Democratic liberal bias.
Tuesday's election will show whether the liberal media can manipulate our democracy by slanting their news coverage. By defeating their candidates, you can vote against the Left wing media.
A 2005 University of California Los Angeles-led study found that 18 of the nation's top 20 media outlets skewed their news coverage significantly to the Left.
"I suspected that many media outlets would tilt to the left because surveys have shown that reporters tend to vote more Democrat than Republican," said UCLA political scientist Tim Groseclose, the study's lead author. "But I was surprised at just how pronounced the distinctions are."
Experts have exposed how the Los Angeles Times, New York Times and other media concoct polls that deliberately "oversample" Democrats to produce results unfavorable to Republicans.
The liberal media beginning last Friday has been touting an editorial in the military careerist-oriented Army Times, sister publication of the Military Times, Navy Times, Air Force Times and Marine Times, calling for the resignation of President George W. Bush's Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld.
The news stories about this seem orchestrated to persuade voters that America's military is turning against the Bush Iraq policy. Unreported, however, is that these are not military-edited publications. They are owned, edited and written by Gannett, the same liberal company that publishes USA Today, a left-of-center newspaper according to the UCLA-led study.
Last Friday Vanity Fair Magazine made news with a press release quoting several neo-conservative Bush advisors. Their quotes, from its forthcoming January issue, suggest that Bush Iraq policy was mistaken and has failed.
Several of those quoted � Richard Pearle, David Frum, Eliot A. Cohen and Michael Rubin � wrote over the weekend in National Review that their words were deceptively edited and distorted. ""Vanity Fair�set my words in its own context in its press release," wrote Frum. "They added words outside the quote marks to change the plain meaning of quotations."
Vanity Fair's sister Conde Nast magazine is The New Yorker, whose investigative reporter Seymour Hersh made news days ago by hyperbolically telling students at McGill University in Montreal that "There has never been an American army as violent and murderous as the one in Iraq."
ABC's Political Director Mark Halperin acknowledges that 70 percent of his ABC colleagues have a pro-Democratic liberal bias.
Tuesday's election will show whether the liberal media can manipulate our democracy by slanting their news coverage. By defeating their candidates, you can vote against the Left wing media.
Dems' sweep isn't guaranteed
President Bush's last-ditch push for votes and Sen. John Kerry's comments that seemed to denigrate the education level of U.S. forces in Iraq have helped energize Republican voters. A Democratic advantage of 23 percentage points a month ago and 13 points two weeks ago is now down to 7 points.
A Pew Research Center survey released Sunday also showed that an 11-point edge for Democrats on the congressional ballot two weeks ago had narrowed to 4 points among likely voters. �It's gone from a slam-dunk for Democrats to take the House to a pretty good chance,� says Andy Kohut, director of the center.
What has shifted is the determination of Republicans to vote. The Democratic advantage among registered voters was 11 points, but Republican voters were more likely to be judged as sure to go to the polls, making the edge among likely voters smaller.
Bush and other Republicans have warned about the perils of electing a Democratic-controlled Congress, and they also accused Kerry of belittling U.S. troops in Iraq with comments he said were a botched joke.
In the Pew survey, 84% of voters said they had heard about Kerry's remark, and 18% of independent voters said it raised serious doubts about voting for a Democrat.
A Pew Research Center survey released Sunday also showed that an 11-point edge for Democrats on the congressional ballot two weeks ago had narrowed to 4 points among likely voters. �It's gone from a slam-dunk for Democrats to take the House to a pretty good chance,� says Andy Kohut, director of the center.
What has shifted is the determination of Republicans to vote. The Democratic advantage among registered voters was 11 points, but Republican voters were more likely to be judged as sure to go to the polls, making the edge among likely voters smaller.
Bush and other Republicans have warned about the perils of electing a Democratic-controlled Congress, and they also accused Kerry of belittling U.S. troops in Iraq with comments he said were a botched joke.
In the Pew survey, 84% of voters said they had heard about Kerry's remark, and 18% of independent voters said it raised serious doubts about voting for a Democrat.
US Soldiers in Iraq Say No Pullout Until Job Is Done
For the U.S. troops fighting in Iraq, the war is alternately violent and hopeful, sometimes very hot and sometimes very cold. It is dusty and muddy, calm and chaotic, deafeningly loud and eerily quiet.
The one thing the war is not, however, is finished, dozens of soldiers across the country said in interviews. And leaving Iraq now would have devastating consequences, they said.
With a potentially historic U.S. midterm election on Tuesday and the war in Iraq a major issue at the polls, many soldiers said the United States should not abandon its effort here. Such a move, enlisted soldiers and officers said, would set Iraq on a path to civil war, give new life to the insurgency and create the possibility of a failed state after nearly four years of fighting to implant democracy.
"Take us out of that vacuum -- and it's on the edge now -- and boom, it would become a free-for-all," said Lt. Col. Mark Suich, who commands the 1st Squadron, 89th Cavalry Regiment just south of Baghdad. "It would be a raw contention for power. That would be the bloodiest piece of this war."
The soldiers declined to discuss the political jousting back home, but they expressed support for the Bush administration's approach to the war, which they described as sticking with a tumultuous situation to give Iraq a chance to stand on its own.
Leading Democrats have argued for a timeline to bring U.S. troops home, because obvious progress has been elusive, especially in Baghdad, and even some Republican lawmakers have recently called for a change in strategy. But soldiers criticized the idea of a precipitate withdrawal, largely because they believe their hard work would go for naught.
Capt. Jim Modlin, 26, of Oceanport, N.J., said he thought the situation in Iraq had improved between his deployment in 2003 and his return this year as a liaison officer to Iraqi security forces with the 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment, based here on FOB Sykes outside Tall Afar. Modlin described himself as more liberal than conservative and said he had already cast his absentee ballot in Texas. He said he believed that U.S. elected officials would lead the military in the right direction, regardless of what happens Tuesday.
"Pulling out now would be as bad or worse than going forward with no changes," Modlin said. "Sectarian violence would be rampant, democracy would cease to exist, and the rule of law would be decimated. It's not 'stay the course,' and it's not 'cut and run' or other political catchphrases. There are people's lives here. There are so many different dynamics that go on here that a simple solution just isn't possible."
Capt. Mike Lingenfelter, 32, of Panhandle, Tex., said that U.S. troops have earned the trust of residents in Tall Afar over the past couple of years and that leaving now would send the wrong message. His Comanche Troop of the 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment is working with Iraqi forces to give them control of the city.
"We'll pull their feet out from under them if we leave," Lingenfelter said.
"It's still fragile enough now that if the coalition were to leave, it would embolden the insurgents. A lot of people have put their trust and faith in us to see it to the end. It would be an extreme betrayal for us to leave."
Sgt. Jonathan Kirkendall, 23, of Falls City, Neb., said he fears that many Americans think that building the country to viability will be "quick and easy," when he believes it could take many years. Kirkendall, of the 2nd Brigade, 10th Mountain Division in Baghdad, is on his third deployment to Iraq and celebrated his 21st and 23rd birthdays here.
"If they say leave in six months, we'll leave in six months. If they say six years, it's six years," said Kirkendall, who is awaiting the birth of his first daughter, due next week.
The one thing the war is not, however, is finished, dozens of soldiers across the country said in interviews. And leaving Iraq now would have devastating consequences, they said.
With a potentially historic U.S. midterm election on Tuesday and the war in Iraq a major issue at the polls, many soldiers said the United States should not abandon its effort here. Such a move, enlisted soldiers and officers said, would set Iraq on a path to civil war, give new life to the insurgency and create the possibility of a failed state after nearly four years of fighting to implant democracy.
"Take us out of that vacuum -- and it's on the edge now -- and boom, it would become a free-for-all," said Lt. Col. Mark Suich, who commands the 1st Squadron, 89th Cavalry Regiment just south of Baghdad. "It would be a raw contention for power. That would be the bloodiest piece of this war."
The soldiers declined to discuss the political jousting back home, but they expressed support for the Bush administration's approach to the war, which they described as sticking with a tumultuous situation to give Iraq a chance to stand on its own.
Leading Democrats have argued for a timeline to bring U.S. troops home, because obvious progress has been elusive, especially in Baghdad, and even some Republican lawmakers have recently called for a change in strategy. But soldiers criticized the idea of a precipitate withdrawal, largely because they believe their hard work would go for naught.
Capt. Jim Modlin, 26, of Oceanport, N.J., said he thought the situation in Iraq had improved between his deployment in 2003 and his return this year as a liaison officer to Iraqi security forces with the 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment, based here on FOB Sykes outside Tall Afar. Modlin described himself as more liberal than conservative and said he had already cast his absentee ballot in Texas. He said he believed that U.S. elected officials would lead the military in the right direction, regardless of what happens Tuesday.
"Pulling out now would be as bad or worse than going forward with no changes," Modlin said. "Sectarian violence would be rampant, democracy would cease to exist, and the rule of law would be decimated. It's not 'stay the course,' and it's not 'cut and run' or other political catchphrases. There are people's lives here. There are so many different dynamics that go on here that a simple solution just isn't possible."
"This is a worthwhile endeavor," said Maj. Gen. Benjamin Mixon, commander of Multinational Division North and the 25th Infantry Division. "Nothing that is worthwhile is usually easy, and we need to give this more time for it to all come together. We all want to come home, but we have a significant investment here, and we need to give the Iraqi army and the Iraqi people a chance to succeed."
Capt. Mike Lingenfelter, 32, of Panhandle, Tex., said that U.S. troops have earned the trust of residents in Tall Afar over the past couple of years and that leaving now would send the wrong message. His Comanche Troop of the 3rd Squadron, 4th Cavalry Regiment is working with Iraqi forces to give them control of the city.
"We'll pull their feet out from under them if we leave," Lingenfelter said.
"It's still fragile enough now that if the coalition were to leave, it would embolden the insurgents. A lot of people have put their trust and faith in us to see it to the end. It would be an extreme betrayal for us to leave."
Sgt. Jonathan Kirkendall, 23, of Falls City, Neb., said he fears that many Americans think that building the country to viability will be "quick and easy," when he believes it could take many years. Kirkendall, of the 2nd Brigade, 10th Mountain Division in Baghdad, is on his third deployment to Iraq and celebrated his 21st and 23rd birthdays here.
"If they say leave in six months, we'll leave in six months. If they say six years, it's six years," said Kirkendall, who is awaiting the birth of his first daughter, due next week.
"I'm just an average soldier, and I'll do what they tell me to do. I'm proud to be a part of it, either way it goes, but I'd like to see it through."
Sunday, November 05, 2006
Republicans Closing Gap As Election Nears�
What happened to the increasing generic ballot lead of the dems? We have seen numbers ranging from 11-15% for the Dems. But now comes a Washington Post/ABC News poll showing only a 6% lead for the dems! It was 14% in the last poll. That is a big turn for the Reps here in the last weekend of this election. The Dems may not be losing as much as pollsters are fixing their turnout models.
Some examples:
Bush job approval: 43%, up from 40 (Registered Voters)
Generic Likely Voter, Dem +6 (down from Dem +14)
Right Track/Wrong Track (RV): 39/59, up from 32/66
Who do you trust on Iraq (RV)? Dem 42, Rep 42, up from Dem 48, Rep 40
Party that best reflects your values (RV): Dems 48, Rep 44, up from Dems 53, Reps 37
Some examples:
Bush job approval: 43%, up from 40 (Registered Voters)
Generic Likely Voter, Dem +6 (down from Dem +14)
Right Track/Wrong Track (RV): 39/59, up from 32/66
Who do you trust on Iraq (RV)? Dem 42, Rep 42, up from Dem 48, Rep 40
Party that best reflects your values (RV): Dems 48, Rep 44, up from Dems 53, Reps 37
Kennedy Offered to Help Soviets Thwart U.S. Policies, KGB Papers Show
While Soviet troops occupied Afghanistan in 1980, Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) worked in close concert with high level Kremlin officials to alter the direction of U.S. policy, according to documents made available through a KGB defector.
Details concerning Kennedy's correspondence with KGB agents are included in the writings of the late Vasiliy Mitrokhin who defected to Britain in 1992. The Mitrokhin papers highlight a meeting that took place at the behest of Kennedy between former Sen. John Tunney (D-Calif.) and KGB agents in Moscow on March 5, 1980.
The exchange of information between Tunney and the KGB is included as part of a report Mitrokhin filed with the Cold War International History Project of the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington D.C. The former KGB man continued to work with British intelligence until the time of his death.
Noted Cold War author and researcher Herbert Romerstein told Cybercast News Service Mitrokhin was a "highly credible source" with vast knowledge of the now-closed KGB archives.
Prior to his defection, Mitrokhin made meticulous copies of KGB documents by hand, explained Romerstein, who headed the U.S. government's Office to Counter Soviet Disinformation and Active Measures during the 1980s.
The KGB defector smuggled out six cases of notes that formed the basis of his reporting.
The KGB files Mitrokhin retrieved indicate that Kennedy fixed the blame for heightened international tensions on the Carter White House, not on the Kremlin. Kennedy at the time was challenging incumbent Carter for the Democratic nomination for president.
Tunney told his KGB counterparts that Kennedy was impressed by the foreign policy statements made by then General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev. Kennedy saw in Brezhnev a leader who was firmly committed to the policy of "d�tente," the report said.
But, in Kennedy's estimation, the Carter administration had assumed an overly belligerent posture toward the Soviet Union after the invasion of Afghanistan, Mitrokhin wrote.
In Kennedy's view, "the atmosphere of tension and hostility towards the whole Soviet people was being fuelled by Carter" as well as by some key advisors, the Pentagon and the U.S. military industrial complex, the Mitrokhin report states.
Throughout the meeting Tunney remained focused on the separation between Kennedy's proposals and the official stance of the Carter White House. While official U.S. policy called for the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan, Kennedy avoided "touching the question of the legality of the presence of Soviet troops," Mitrokhin reported.
Instead, Kennedy relayed through his envoy, Tunney, his support for a withdrawal of Soviet forces that would be coupled with policy directives that "guaranteed non-interference" by competing foreign powers in the internal affairs of Afghanistan.
Since there was intense disagreement between Kennedy and the administration on policy toward the Soviets, Tunney told the KGB that the Massachusetts senator had concluded "it was his duty to take action himself, which could force the Carter administration to act to de-escalate the crisis," Mitrokhin wrote.
Details concerning Kennedy's correspondence with KGB agents are included in the writings of the late Vasiliy Mitrokhin who defected to Britain in 1992. The Mitrokhin papers highlight a meeting that took place at the behest of Kennedy between former Sen. John Tunney (D-Calif.) and KGB agents in Moscow on March 5, 1980.
The exchange of information between Tunney and the KGB is included as part of a report Mitrokhin filed with the Cold War International History Project of the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington D.C. The former KGB man continued to work with British intelligence until the time of his death.
Noted Cold War author and researcher Herbert Romerstein told Cybercast News Service Mitrokhin was a "highly credible source" with vast knowledge of the now-closed KGB archives.
Prior to his defection, Mitrokhin made meticulous copies of KGB documents by hand, explained Romerstein, who headed the U.S. government's Office to Counter Soviet Disinformation and Active Measures during the 1980s.
The KGB defector smuggled out six cases of notes that formed the basis of his reporting.
The KGB files Mitrokhin retrieved indicate that Kennedy fixed the blame for heightened international tensions on the Carter White House, not on the Kremlin. Kennedy at the time was challenging incumbent Carter for the Democratic nomination for president.
Tunney told his KGB counterparts that Kennedy was impressed by the foreign policy statements made by then General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev. Kennedy saw in Brezhnev a leader who was firmly committed to the policy of "d�tente," the report said.
But, in Kennedy's estimation, the Carter administration had assumed an overly belligerent posture toward the Soviet Union after the invasion of Afghanistan, Mitrokhin wrote.
In Kennedy's view, "the atmosphere of tension and hostility towards the whole Soviet people was being fuelled by Carter" as well as by some key advisors, the Pentagon and the U.S. military industrial complex, the Mitrokhin report states.
Throughout the meeting Tunney remained focused on the separation between Kennedy's proposals and the official stance of the Carter White House. While official U.S. policy called for the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan, Kennedy avoided "touching the question of the legality of the presence of Soviet troops," Mitrokhin reported.
Instead, Kennedy relayed through his envoy, Tunney, his support for a withdrawal of Soviet forces that would be coupled with policy directives that "guaranteed non-interference" by competing foreign powers in the internal affairs of Afghanistan.
Since there was intense disagreement between Kennedy and the administration on policy toward the Soviets, Tunney told the KGB that the Massachusetts senator had concluded "it was his duty to take action himself, which could force the Carter administration to act to de-escalate the crisis," Mitrokhin wrote.
Saddam Guilty...Sentenced to Death
An Iraqi court sentenced Saddam Hussein to
death today for ordering the execution of 148 men in Dujail, Iraq, in
1982.
Thousands of people in Baghdad took to the streets to celebrate the
verdict. The Iraqi High Tribunal sentenced two other defendants to death
and four to prison and acquitted one.
In anticipation of the verdict, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki
had imposed a curfew in Baghdad and two Diyala and Salaheddin provinces.
The two provinces are primarily Sunni and were the base of Saddam's
support during his dictatorship. Shiite and Kurdish provinces were not
under curfew.
"The Saddam Hussein era is in the past now, as was the era of Hitler
and Mussolini," al-Maliki said following the verdict. "We want an Iraq
where all Iraqis are equal before the law," he said. "The policy of
discrimination and persecution is over."
U.S. forces captured Saddam hiding in a hole in the ground in December
2003. In a written statement, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad
called the verdict "an important milestone for Iraq as the country
takes another major step forward in the building of a free society based on
the rule of law."
Khalilzad said the verdicts demonstrate the commitment of the Iraqi
people to hold the members of the former regime accountable for their
actions.
All involved in the case showed courage in proceeding with it, the
ambassador said. Baathist "dead-enders" tried to intimidate members of the
court, and insurgents killed three defense lawyers in the course of the
trial, he noted.
"Their determination to pursue justice is a signal that the rule of law
will prevail in Iraq despite the difficult situation that the country
now faces," Khalilzad said. "A former dictator feared by millions, who
killed his own citizens without mercy or justice, who waged wars against
neighboring countries, has been brought to trial in his own country -
held accountable in a court of law with ordinary citizens bearing
witness."
The ambassador said that although Iraq may face difficult days in the
coming weeks, "closing the book on Saddam and his regime is an
opportunity to unite and build a better future. As the Iraqi people move
forward, the United States will support them in their efforts to build a just
and democratic society."
Saddam's case will be appealed automatically to the Appellate Chamber
of the Iraqi High Tribunal. The defense has 30 days to file any motions.
death today for ordering the execution of 148 men in Dujail, Iraq, in
1982.
Thousands of people in Baghdad took to the streets to celebrate the
verdict. The Iraqi High Tribunal sentenced two other defendants to death
and four to prison and acquitted one.
In anticipation of the verdict, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki
had imposed a curfew in Baghdad and two Diyala and Salaheddin provinces.
The two provinces are primarily Sunni and were the base of Saddam's
support during his dictatorship. Shiite and Kurdish provinces were not
under curfew.
"The Saddam Hussein era is in the past now, as was the era of Hitler
and Mussolini," al-Maliki said following the verdict. "We want an Iraq
where all Iraqis are equal before the law," he said. "The policy of
discrimination and persecution is over."
U.S. forces captured Saddam hiding in a hole in the ground in December
2003. In a written statement, U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Zalmay Khalilzad
called the verdict "an important milestone for Iraq as the country
takes another major step forward in the building of a free society based on
the rule of law."
Khalilzad said the verdicts demonstrate the commitment of the Iraqi
people to hold the members of the former regime accountable for their
actions.
All involved in the case showed courage in proceeding with it, the
ambassador said. Baathist "dead-enders" tried to intimidate members of the
court, and insurgents killed three defense lawyers in the course of the
trial, he noted.
"Their determination to pursue justice is a signal that the rule of law
will prevail in Iraq despite the difficult situation that the country
now faces," Khalilzad said. "A former dictator feared by millions, who
killed his own citizens without mercy or justice, who waged wars against
neighboring countries, has been brought to trial in his own country -
held accountable in a court of law with ordinary citizens bearing
witness."
The ambassador said that although Iraq may face difficult days in the
coming weeks, "closing the book on Saddam and his regime is an
opportunity to unite and build a better future. As the Iraqi people move
forward, the United States will support them in their efforts to build a just
and democratic society."
Saddam's case will be appealed automatically to the Appellate Chamber
of the Iraqi High Tribunal. The defense has 30 days to file any motions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)