It is for some time now that the International Crisis Group has featured prominently in agency reports and newspaper articles, especially when dealing with the Balkans. If just one “expert” is quoted in any report, odds are it will be someone from the ICG. With more than one, it is guaranteed. But why?
Chris Deliso has done some great work on exposing the ICG-IWPR axis in Macedonia, which he called “the barking dogs of intervention” back in 2002. IWPR’s agenda is not a mystery, and neither is ICG’s, as it should be apparent from their reports. From denying the existence of Islamic terrorism in the Balkans to advocating the separation of Kosovo and Montenegro, occupation of Serbia and forcible unitarization of Bosnia, the ICG has been an extremist voice of Imperial intervention, saying things the regime in Washington (whoever runs it) could not say in public. Their board is a veritable Who’s Who of Imperial policy, including some “luminaries” of the previous decade’s Balkans cataclysm. This explains why, while technically just a minor NGO, staffed by second-hand analysts and advocacy journalists, ICG gets mention in the press all the time: it represents the Voice of Authority (i.e. the foreign policy-makers), always dear to the presstitutes. Better yet, because they are not the government, they – and the presstitutes – can pretend there is no agenda behind their rhetoric other than “peace” and “stability.” But every time you see an ICG “expert” (who is nothing of the sort) quoted in a media report of any kind, remember – this is a conduit of Empire, no more, no less. Continue reading “Presstitutes’ Darling”
Abuse of Govt Power
Bravo, Senator Daschle! I’m also tired of the the Bush Administration’s attacks on those who criticize them!
Read today’s Floor Statement by Senator Daschle, on the Abuse of Government Power.
Conditions for Rice testimony
Here’s the letter setting forth the conditions under which the White House agreed to let Condoleezza Rice testify publicly, under oath to the 9/11 commission.
A couple of interesting passages:
It starts off with a little joke to break the ice, “The president has consistently stated a policy of strong support for the commission and instructed the executive branch to provide unprecedented and extraordinary access to the commission. Ok, now to the meat of the thing.
- The commission must agree in writing that Dr. Rice’s testimony before the commission does not set any precedent for future commission requests, or requests in any other context, for testimony by a national security adviser or any other White House official.
- The commission must agree in writing that it will not request additional public testimony from any White House official, including Dr. Rice.
So, the main point is that they get one shot at Rice and NO ONE ELSE.
Here’s the deal on Georgie and BackSeat:
I am authorized to advise you that the president and vice president have agreed to one joint private session with all 10 commissioners, with one commission staff member present to take notes of the session.
No time limit, apparently.
UPDATE: Josh Marshall on the Shrub/Backseat joint testimony condition, “One can speculate about several reasons — one in particular — for making this stipulation. And, in addition to having no conceivable constitutional basis, none of them are flattering.”
Rice pops under pressure
Pass the popcorn.
Rice is going to testify under oath to the 9/11 commission after all.
What’s my line?
“He is very good at denial and deception. I am not sure he even knows what the truth is anymore,” Goss said. “I think he’s been surrounded by yes-men and sycophants.”
House Intelligence Chairman Porter Goss, R-Fla
Guess who Goss is talking about before you click the link.
Thanks to my friend Zviadist for the pointer.
