On Thursday, former Judge Radhi al-Radhi, Iraq's top anticorruption official until he was recently forced out by the government of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, appeared before the House government oversight committee and described what had become of people who had worked for him at the Commission on Public Integrity as they investigated crime and fraud within the Iraqi government:

Thirty-one employees have been killed as well as at least twelve family members. In a number of cases, my staff and their relatives have been kidnapped or detained and tortured prior to being killed. Many of these people were gunned down at close range. This includes my staff member Mohammed Abd Salif, who was gunned down with his seven-month pregnant wife. In one case of targeted death and torture, the security chief on my staff was threatened with death many times. His father was recently kidnapped and killed because of his son's work at CPI. His body hung on a meat hook. One of my staff members who performed clerical duties was protected by my security staff, but his 80-year-old father was kidnapped because his son worked at CPI. When his dead body was found, a power drill had been used to drill his body with holes. Waleed Kashmoula was the head of CPI's Mosul branch. In March 2005, a suicide bomber met with Waleed in his office...and then set off his vest [bomb], killing Waleed....My family's home has been attacked by rockets. I have had a sniper bullet striking near me as I was outside my office. We have learned the hard way that the corrupt will stop at nothing.

Minutes later, Republicans members of the committee were suggesting there was nothing unusual or shocking about corruption in Iraq. "Corruption is not a new phenomenon," remarked Representative Tom Davis, the senior GOPer on the panel. Another committee Republican, Representative Darrell Issa, huffed, "We're not surprised a country that was run by a corrupt dictator...would have a pattern of corruption." And Republican Representative John Mica noted that corruption plagues many democratic countries, including the United States. Mica cited Watergate and the prosecution of Reagan administration officials, and he claimed that the Clinton administration had "the most number of witnesses to die suddenly."

Their spin: corruption in Iraq is no big deal.

But Radhi in his testimony reiterated what he said in an interview with me several weeks ago: corruption is "rampant" within Iraq (perverting virtually every ministry and costing tens of billions of dollars); it's undermining the entire government and has "stopped the process of reconstruction"; Maliki has consistently blocked corruption investigations (especially probes involving his associates and family); in some instances corruption is "financing terrorism" by funding sectarian militias; and the situation is getting worse. Radhi noted that of the 3000 corruption cases his commission investigated and forwarded to Iraqi courts for prosecution, only 241 have been adjudicated. Also appearing as a witness at the hearing, Stuart Bowen Jr., the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction, echoed Radhi, testifying that corruption within the Iraqi government is the "second insurgency." Bowen reported that corruption is on the rise in Iraq--partly due to Maliki's protection of crooked officials. He quoted one Iraqi official who said that "corruption is threatening the state."

That is, this is worse than Watergate. (And back then, no one investigating Richard Nixon's dirty tricks ended up dead and suspended on a meat hook.)

Radhi agreed with the Republicans that corruption was present during the days of Saddam Hussein, but he pointed out that the current corruption "is undermining my country." And he was not fazed when the GOPers tried to discredit his testimony. Republican Representative Dan Burton excitedly pointed out that Radhi had once served as a prosecutor during the Saddam years. (Burton did not mention that Radhi was twice imprisoned and tortured during the Saddam years and still bears the scars.) And Issa suggested that Radhi was appearing at the hearing (and offering testimony inconvenient for the Bush administration) in return for receiving backing from congressional Democrats for an asylum request Radhi recently submitted to the U.S. government for himself and family members.

Radhi came to the United States in August with ten of his CPI investigators for training sessions set up by the Justice Department. While he was in the Washington area, the Maliki government forcibly removed him from his post, accusing him of corruption and essentially stranding him with almost no source of funds. As one of his associates said at the hearing, "If Maliki is right and Judge Radhi stole millions of dollars, why did he have to check out of his hotel here when he couldn't pay the bill?" Christopher Griffith, a State Department official who worked with Radhi, in a pre-hearing interview with the House committee called Radhi "the most honest government of Iraq official that I have met in my 21 months in the country." Arthur Brennan, a former State Department official (and a past New Hampshire state judge) who worked with Radhi in Iraq, has called him "courageous, honest, and effective." Bowen dubbed him, "My most reliable partner....in Iraq."

The Republican attempt to taint Radhi was predictable. Radhi, who has praised the U.S. invasion of Iraq, said he has no political agenda. But his testimony raised a troubling question for the Bush administration: should the United States expend American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars to create "breathing space" for a government that may be too corrupt to achieve political reconciliation or provide essential services to its citizens? As Representative Henry Waxman, the Democratic chairman of the committee, put it, "We need to ask, Is the Maliki government too corrupt to succeed? And if the Maliki government is corrupt, we need to ask whether we can in good conscience continue to sacrifice our blood and tax dollars to prop up his regime."

In response to the Republicans' corruption-is-everywhere defense, Radhi maintained that the "issue is different in Iraq....The infrastructure in Iraq is almost equal to zero. Services in the country is almost equal to zero." He noted that Iraq is a wealthy nation and that its government recently had a budget of $71 billion. Yet, he added, this money has not been used to rebuild and revive the country. David Walker, the comptroller general and another witness at the hearing, tried to spell out why corruption is a significant matter: "When the United States has 160,000 troops on the ground and billions of dollars invested...we ought to be concerned [with corruption] because it can have a direct impact on the Iraqi government's ability to achieve the 18 benchmarks [established by Congress]."

The 62-year-old Radhi left the hearing room quickly after testifying, taking no questions from reporters. Gerry Sikorski, one of his attorneys and a former House member, said, "He took a very risky step coming here"--implying that Radhi or his relatives might face reprisals for his testimony. In a written statement handed out by Sikorski, Radhi said that "real corruption...is destroying my country. It is impossible to have both democracy and corruption at the same time."

At the hearing, Waxman released a committee memorandum indicating that the Bush administration has mounted no serious effort regarding corruption within the Maliki government. After conducting interviews with several State Department officials responsible for anticorruption activity in Iraq, Waxman's committee concluded that "dysfunction and disarray...appear to be frustrating U.S. anticorruption efforts." Former Judge Brennan, who briefly headed State Department's Office of Accountability and Transparency (OAT), told committee investigators there was no coordinated U.S. strategy for combating corruption in Iraq. Michael Richards, the executive secretary of the Anticorruption Working Group, an interagency task force, said that his outfit did not have a coordinator for half a year and that few officials bothered to attend its meetings. And according to the committee memorandum, for a while this summer the State Department's OAT was run by a paralegal who previously had mainly performed administrative tasks within the department. In his prepared testimony, Inspector General Bowen reported that the U.S. embassy in Baghdad has been lackadaisical in its anticorruption efforts.

Yet after Radhi, Bowen and Walker were finished at the witness table, Ambassador Larry Butler, the deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, testified that the "Department of State has devoted considerable effort and resources to helping courageous Iraqi establish mechanisms and procedures to investigate and prosecute corruption." Butler did not have an easy task. But he stuck to his talking points, and--tougher still--he defended his department's refusal to cooperate fully with Waxman's committee.

Prior to the hearing, Waxman asked the State Department to provide witnesses and documents to his investigators. The department responded by claiming that previously unclassified documents about Iraqi government corruption were now classified (including the U.S. embassy draft report detailing extensive corruption within the Maliki government that I first disclosed in this column) and that any information provided by a State Department officials about corruption in Iraq would have to be classified (meaning it could not be discussed at a public hearing).

Writing to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Waxman contended that this was absurd and outrageous. He argued it was ridiculous for the State Department to claim it could not answer even general questions about Iraqi corruption within a public setting. At the hearing, Waxman hurled a series of queries at Butler. What effect does corruption have on the Iraqi government's ability to achieve political reconciliation? Has Maliki obstructed any corruption investigations? Does the Maliki government have the political will and capability to root out corruption? Is corruption funding the insurgency? Again and again, Butler replied that he would be delighted to answer these questions in the proper setting: a classified hearing behind closed doors. This information, he explained, was secret because its disclosure would "endanger" U.S.-Iraqi relations.

Noting that Rice had previously praised Iraqi anticorruption efforts in public, an upset Waxman declared, "If you say something negative about the Maliki government, it's classified, but if it's positive, then it's not." Representative Stephen Lynch, a Democrat on the committee, angrily remarked, "Do you see the irony here? You've established [for Iraq] a committee on accountability and transparency. But here...you're claiming there is a level of confidentiality...and we cannot tell the American people what we're doing with their money." Butler would not be moved. He kept declining to say anything about corruption in Iraq and its impact on the U.S. efforts there. "Secretary Rice," Waxman warned, "is going to have a confrontation with this committee....The executive branch must answer the questions of the legislative branch."

Well, maybe. In the meantime, it's unclear what will become of Radhi. He has several lawyers working pro bono on his immigration status (and that of his family members). And with the Iraqi government refusing to pay him the retirement benefits usually awarded former government officials of his rank, he will have to find a way to support himself in the United States (assuming he stays here). Moreover, it's not certain what impact, if any, his testimony will have on the ongoing debate in Congress concerning George W. Bush's Iraq policy and the administration's latest funding requests for the war. There were several reporters--but not many--at the hearing.

During his testimony, Radhi said he does not favor a U.S. withdrawal from Iraq. But he did say that the Iraqi government can only function effectively if "professional technocrats...qualified to perform vital government services" are placed in charge. And by his own account, that is not happening. He estimates the Iraqi government is meeting 2 to 5 percent of its obligations--with the rest of its activity committed to waste and fraud.

So Radhi is, as Waxman noted, a man "without a country," and he's also a man caught between his desire (a clean and functioning Iraqi government backed by the United States) and his view of reality (a corrupt Iraqi government that's a threat to him and his family and that does not deserve the support of the United States). By design or not, his testimony does undercut the Bush administration's rationale for the so-called "surge--as would any public examination of corruption within the Iraqi government. Which is why the State Department is in fierce battle with Waxman and why this matter will not end with Radhi's testimony.

According to a Radhi associate, Radhi left the committee room believing he had done the right thing. Even as he was depending on the U.S. government to process his asylum request, he had delivered Congress a straight message that happened to be rather inconvenient for the Bush administration. Then hours later, he received disturbing news: his son, who had been trying to obtain political asylum in England, was ordered by the British government to return to Baghdad. That's where people connected to Radhi have been kidnapped, tortured and killed. "For Judge Radhi," the Radhi associate said, "this put his day on Capitol Hill in a very different light."

UPDATE. From my www.davidcorn.com blog: Two days after former Iraqi Judge Radhi al-Radhi testified in Congress about the rampant corruption within the Iraqi government, Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki struck back. On Saturday, Maliki, who weeks ago forced out Radhi as Iraq's anticorruption chief, announced his government will prosecute Radhi for smuggling documents, for libeling Maliki, and for engaging in corruption himself.

This is not a new strategy for Maliki. A year ago, the Iraq government accused Radhi and the Commission on Public Integrity that he ran of corruption, but the charges went nowhere. (According to a now-confidential U.S. embassy draft report, Radhi's CPI passed an audit with flying colors.) And Radhi's work and integrity has been endorsed by a number of U.S. officials who worked with him, including Stuart Bowen, the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction. By the way, there is documentary evidence showing that Maliki's office has blocked dozens of Radhi's prosecution cases. (Apparently, Maliki is upset that Radhi has copies of these documents and shared them with U.S. congressional investigators.) As for the charge of personal corruption, Radhi shows no signs of having run off with any money. After being stranded in the United States by the Maliki government--which removed him from his post while he was in Washington at the invitation of the Justice Department for a training session--Radhi had to leave his hotel because he could not afford the bill. Friends of his in the United States are now trying to figure out how to raise money for him.

The question is, why is Maliki pursuing Radhi with such vengeance? Yes, Radhi has declared that Maliki's government is so corrupt it ought to be abolished and has accused Maliki of personally stopping corruption investigations targeting his associates and family. And Radhi's appearance on Capitol Hill last week did generate several news stories inconvenient for the Maliki government. But Radhi and his comments have not gotten as much attention as they deserve. From a political perspective, it might have been better for Maliki to ignore Radhi and hope the former judge (who was twice tortured during the days of Saddam Hussein) would slip off into obscurity. Instead, Maliki is pursuing Radhi, and this pursuit will raise Radhi's profile. (I see a 60 Minutes segment in all this.)

Radhi appears to have really gotten to Maliki. More important, Radhi's claims and evidence warrant more notice. As a Washington Post front-page story shows, Iraq's government is unable--and seemingly unwilling--to achieve political reconciliation. If it is also as corrupt and dysfunctional as Radhi says--and the available evidence supports him--then there is no reason for the Bush administration to be supporting the Maliki government and asking American soldiers to die for it. With his anti-Radih crusade, Maliki is digging a deeper hole.

Comments (122)

1. Thanks for a powerful post David.

   It has been abundantly clear to anyone with their eyes open and their brains engaged that the Iraq occupation has been an unmitigated disaster of world historic proportions.

   Even more alarming --for Americans at least-- is the condition of American government that has allowed such a travesty to unfold, and our corporate owned media's passivity in the face of such an overwhelming injustice.

   It is our own political/economic system that should be the focus of any inquiry that wishes to understand the root cause of the Iraq debacle.

   Sadly, a proper inspection is more likely to come via post mortem than from any genuine attempt to fix the problem preemptively.

   The current American presidency has breached its Rubicon, and no one in view is proposing a rollback.

   Posted by b_kool_66 at 10/05/2007 @ 01:12am

2. Republicans are fucking morons. Obviously!!!!!!!

   Posted by Waltz at 10/05/2007 @ 01:38am

3. And corrupt. And they hate government. Which is why they should get out of government and leave it to people who care about what they are doing.

   Posted by Waltz at 10/05/2007 @ 01:49am

4. wow.

   heartless.

   a man of such courage and honour will be reduced to a taxi driver (if he's lucky)

   heartless.

   wow.

   Posted by frosty zoom at 10/05/2007 @ 02:06am

5. David Corn, Excellent article. And once again, we see that sharks protect their own. The rethugs don't see anything wrong with corruption because they wrote the book on it. They accused the Clinton administration of killing people but yet didn't have a shred to prove it. In this case, the evidence of corruption is so overwhelming that they can't deny it. All these assholes can do is say, well, well, well, Clinton did it too. What a bunch of moronic lying losers.

   Posted by Wolfgang1 at 10/05/2007 @ 06:53am

6. Thanks, David. This story also undercuts the juvenile condescending attitude here at "home" that the Iraqis aren't "doing enough." The problem isn't lack of will on the part of the Iraqis--the problem there is the same as here in the U.S.: an oligarchial kleptocracy. But we'll have to wait for a change in government here before the Iraqis get a change in government there.

   Posted by John Sullivan at 10/05/2007 @ 09:36am

7. Mr. Corn, You have to understand the animal you're dealing with. This Administration, with it's neocon mentality and all of it's dutiful subjects do not recognize the Democratic Congress. Because they lost control in '06, their modus operandi now is to consider congress irrelevant. Their arrogance holds no bounds. They have a million excuses as to why they won't answer questions and will demonize anyone, ANYONE who goes against their long range game plan, and we all no what that means.

   So, don't for one minute consider your post ground breaking journalism. This Administration has shown a pattern of negligence with the country's trust and most people could give a shit less. Change will not come until the republican party, especially the neocon elements, are completely destroyed. If democrats hang together, this can be accomplished by 2016.

   The recent flap with the limbaugh smear of troops who disagree with him is an excellant example of how low these people will stoop to get their message across. It is not a message that is healthy for America.

   Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 10:27am

8. This is a very good article. The issue is so serious one doesn't wish to comment lightly. It's always helpful to the public to see the real people involved and the choices they face.

   Posted by RLawrence at 10/05/2007 @ 10:32am

9. excellent work Mr. Corn. If only the rest of the "liberal media" would pick this story up and broadcast it to the main street republicans. There are many Old School repubs that don't find corruption acceptable.

   Can't wait to read the slander of Judge Rahdi and the defense of Iraqi corruption from our very own neo-cons, who hate to see THEIR hard earned tax money wasted on childrens healthcare when it could be used to prop up an Islamic state.

   I am sure Bill/Hillary did something similar that can be used to defend the Maliki "government".

   Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 10:51am

10. Ah, leave it to HAPPLESS to spew some more Junkie talking points from the frothing pie hole of the head of the Wingnut Gassbag Brigade.

    Get a life, jackass.

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 10/05/2007 @ 10:54am

11. Happy,

    Nice try..to post the truth here is a waste of electrons...some of us appreciate the efforts and as you can see, the rest..well, you know.

    The only words missing from Jesse or El-whatever are..

    allah akbahr...and even then, thses guys would even notice...

    Posted by john maasch at 10/05/2007 @ 10:59am

12. or wouldn't they?

    Posted by john maasch at 10/05/2007 @ 11:00am

13. Posted by HAPPY 10/05/2007 @ 10:38am

    You quote Rush Limbaugh? BUWAHAHAHAHAHA. Jesus, what a maroon.

    So, Happy, why don't you wax eloquent about:

    Jessica Lynch going down in a hail of bullets and then being rescued from rapists and republican guards.

    How Patrick Tillman died from gunshots from Taliban

    How the tens of thousands of litres of anthrax were destined for the US subway system

    How Max Cleland was drunk and dropped a grenade on himself

    How Murtha was a "fake" soldier

    How the Clintons had Vince Foster killed

    How we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud, brought about by the nookyular program that "no doubt" exists

    How victory in Iraq is just around the corner.

    *****

    You do realize that it is YOUR money, made from the Perfect Stock Market, that is being WASTED in Iraq, don't you? Or do you realize that it is your childrens, and your grand childrens money being borrowed from Commies and Islamists that is being WASTED in Iraq?

    no, you just count your beans and refuse to fight the good fight.

    Rush. HAHAHAHA. Unbelievable. Really. Why don;t you crawl back up Coulters skirt and stay there.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 11:00am

14. JOHN, I know you hate guvt waste, where is your outrage? Would it help in Maliki formed a union? Would that get you attention?

    Don't you think we owe this judge a lot? shouldn't he be given a green card and a place to live for a few months, maybe an office til he can get back on his feet. Like Chalibi? Unlike Chalibi, this guy is not a wanted felon. This guy put his life, and his families life, on the line.

    Unlike you and HAPPYCOWARD,

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 11:04am

15. RUSH:"I think this reason why girls don't do well on multiple choice tests goes all the way back to the Bible, all the way back to Genesis, Adam and Eve. God said, 'All right, Eve, multiple choice or multiple orgasms, what's it going to be?' We all know what was chosen" (TV, Feb. 23, 1994).

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 11:08am

16. During the September 28 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, in response to Media Matters for America's documentation of his recent description of service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as "phony soldiers," Rush Limbaugh claimed that he had not been talking "about the anti-war movement generally," but rather "about one soldier ... Jesse MacBeth." Limbaugh further asserted that "Media Matters had the transcript, but they selectively choose what they want to make their point." To support this claim, Limbaugh purported to air the "entire" segment in question from the September 26 broadcast of his show. In fact, the clip he then aired had been edited. Excised from the clip was a full 1 minute and 35 seconds of the 1 minute and 50 second discussion that occurred between Limbaugh's original "phony soldiers" comment and his reference to MacBeth, the full audio of which can be heard here .

    Prior to airing the edited clip, Limbaugh said: "Here is, it runs about 3 minutes and 13 seconds, the entire transcript, in context, that led to this so-called controversy." After the clip ended, Limbaugh stated: "That was the transcript from yesterday's program,

    ....LIMBAUGH: -- the weapons of mass destruction. We gotta get beyond that. We're, we're there. What -- who cares if, if -- we all know they were there

    Really? Where?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 11:17am

17. Of course Rush the drug addict will take one person and make him out to be an entire movement. I have to assume that these groups are all fake too:

    http://www.ivaw.org/--Iraq veterans against the war

    http://www.vvaw.org/-- Vietnam veterans against the war

    http://www.veteransforpeace.org/

    ALl of these guys must hate America. It is the only possible conclusion.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 11:22am

18. "If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and yet depreciate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightning. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what a people will submit to, and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." Frederick Douglass

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 11:25am

19. The silence from the neo-cons on the corruption of the Iraqi guvt is deafening.

    It's all good. Nothing to see here, folks. Move along. Just billions of dollars going down the toilet. Lets' focus on the real Bad Guys, the teachers unions and workers of America.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 11:33am

20. They're hoping of they keep quiet the Don will "give them a taste".

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 10/05/2007 @ 11:43am

21. Clear Channel Rejects VoteVets Ad Because It ‘Conflicts' With Listeners Who Tune Into Rush

    Rush Limbaugh's hometown radio station that broadcasts his show -- WJNO AM in Palm Beach, Florida -- has refused to air a VoteVets ad by Brian McGough, the Iraq war veteran who was compared by Limbaugh to a suicide bomber.

    John Hunt, the vice president/market manager for Clear Channel in Palm Beach, wrote a letter yesterday explaining his station's decision not air McGough's ad. Hunt's rationale was not that the ad was inaccurate or that it posed legal issues, but rather, the ad presented information that "would conflict with the listeners who have chosen to listen to Rush Limbaugh."

    Last night on Countdown, McGough issued this challenge to Limbaugh: "Ask me or any other members of VoteVets.org to come on your program and talk to you and tell you how we feel." But Limbaugh is desperately trying to hide behind his microphone where he can launch verbal assaults without having to defend them.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 1:56pm

22. "Corruption is not a new phenomenon."

    Neither are mass graves, but you wanted to launch a full-scale invasion because of 'em. Something needn't be new to be a crisis.

    "We're not surprised a country that was run by a corrupt dictator...would have a pattern of corruption."

    Well, funny how you didn't mention this before we invaded. It would have been nice if the American people knew that the "democracy" we were going to install was going to be corrupt to the core and be putting people on meathooks (now, these meathooks, are they in the "rape rooms"?)

    Republican Representative John Mica ☼ noted that corruption plagues many democratic countries, including the United States.

    Yes, a country of 300 million people has corruption. No shit. Iraq is, what, the size of California? If Arnold were killing anyone who spoke out against him or tried to investigate him, what would you say then, Mica?

    Mica cited Watergate and the prosecution of Reagan administration officials, and he claimed that the Clinton administration had "the most number of witnesses to die suddenly."

    Wow, this is off the deep end. Is Mica accusing the Clinton administration of murdering witnesses? Or is he merely making an observation about statistics? If the former, he'd better be prepared to back up such a statement (and he can't); if the latter, he's just flat wrong (the Mob, among others, are well ahead of any President).

    What a pile of shitheads we've got running things. I am afraid that America has reached its peak and is serious decline. Time to learn Chinese.

    Posted by BlueSpark at 10/05/2007 @ 12:41pm

23. well, indeed a certain amount of corruption is unavoidable in this corrupt old world...

    BUT YOU STILL HAVE TO FIGHT IT!

    wow...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 10/05/2007 @ 1:12pm

24. SIGIR 07-015T Page 1 of 9

    TESTIMONY OF STUART W. BOWEN, JR.

    SPECIAL INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR IRAQ RECONSTRUCTION

    "ASSESSING THE STATE OF IRAQI CORRUPTION"

    HOUSE COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM

    OCTOBER 4, 2007

    "...This past August, I visited Iraq for the 17th time since my appointment three and a half years ago as the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. While in Baghdad, I met with key Coalition and Iraqi officials on the subject of corruption within the Government of Iraq. SIGIR has regularly reported on Iraqi corruption in our past 14 quarterly reports, and we have conducted two audits of U.S. support to Iraq's anticorruption institutions.

    The Second Insurgency

    Since mid-2003, Iraq has struggled against a violent insurgency. Corruption has concomitantly afflicted the Iraqi government, exerting a corrosive force upon Iraq's fledgling democracy. SIGIR has described that force as the "second insurgency." Prime Minister Maliki recently echoed this sentiment, referring to his country's struggle against corruption as "the second war in Iraq."

    It is instructive to note how the anti-war brigade here operates. It seems to have been totally unaware that corruption in the Iraq government and its departments (and beyond) was identified and has been the focus of much work by your own "anti-corruption specialist" Stuart Bowen and his office, and others, since 2003. You may notice, from the above excerpt, that he has visited Iraq 17 times and issued 14 quarterly reports.

    Your prissy over reactions indicate that you had been asleep on this issue until David Corn gave you a chance to minutely recover from the shock and awe reaction that you have been suffering, over the obvious set backs caused by the good news out of Iraq and Congress's inaction or inability to make your wildest (or even more moderate) dreams come true.

    My suggestion is that you read all this report. Get yourselves informed and be prepared for more "bad" news as the grand war on the "second" insurgency is prosecuted by Americans, better equipped, for such a task, than your mob could ever imagine. I don't know about Republicans but I can assure you that anyone who understands how democracy works, knows that corruption in a nation's government, its agencies and in its business community, is inimical to its proper formation, functioning and growth.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 10/05/2007 @ 1:39pm

25. Posted by HAPPY 10/05/2007 @ 10:38am

    Nice try but this flap has nothing to do with Jesse macbeth. Limbaugh has a long history of slandering soldiers who disagree with the war. Everytime he talks about unpatriotic liberals and democrats and how they're invested in the defeat of America, he knowingly is including all those soldiers who are democrats and their families. So please don't insult my intelligence. Limbaugh may be able to fool a willing dupe like yourself but he's have to go a long way to put one over on me and the majority of Americans for that matter. I will concede that there are millions of his Dittoheads out there. It has something to do with the part of their brain that beleives bullshit. Give it up. Limbaugh is not credible.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 1:42pm

26. Posted by MASK 10/05/2007 @ 11:18am

    OK, I'll bite. First of all, my call for the destruction of the republican party is that party which exists today. The party has been hijacked by a really dangerous group of people. It started mainly during the Reagan admin. while he was sleeping. There are some good people in the party, true conservatives but they are few and far between. The party needs a major overhaul. That overhaul will be well recieved by the masses I think. They need to clean house starting with Limbaugh. They need to condemn him because his real agenda is to divide America and replace our form of government with something closer to a dictatorship. His philosophy is one that would have appealed to the masses that followed Hitler.

    As for censoring him, I would go much further if I had the chance. I would love to meet him face to face and challange him to call me unpatriotic or un-American to my face. I can assure you, he would suffer a very bad beating. Then when he got back on his feet, my son would finish the job. This man is a disgusting pig of a human being and his support from republicans only furthers my resolve that the party has to go. Just yeasterday, his bosses let it be known that there would be no air time sold to the veterans who are outraged by his remarks. It would offend Rush's listeners was their reason. THAT'S CENSORSHIP! Was that clear enough for you?

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 1:54pm

27. Clear Channel Rejects VoteVets Ad Because It ‘Conflicts' With Listeners Who Tune Into Rush

    Rush Limbaugh's hometown radio station that broadcasts his show -- WJNO AM in Palm Beach, Florida -- has refused to air a VoteVets ad by Brian McGough, the Iraq war veteran who was compared by Limbaugh to a suicide bomber.

    John Hunt, the vice president/market manager for Clear Channel in Palm Beach, wrote a letter yesterday explaining his station's decision not air McGough's ad. Hunt's rationale was not that the ad was inaccurate or that it posed legal issues, but rather, the ad presented information that "would conflict with the listeners who have chosen to listen to Rush Limbaugh."

    Last night on Countdown, McGough issued this challenge to Limbaugh: "Ask me or any other members of VoteVets.org to come on your program and talk to you and tell you how we feel." But Limbaugh is desperately trying to hide behind his microphone where he can launch verbal assaults without having to defend them.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 1:59pm

28. Posted by CRABWALK 10/05/2007 @ 11:00am

    That was a great post but the list is quite a bit longer. People like Happy and some of the other wingers who post here just can't be reasoned with. Something bad happened in their childhoods to make thenm into the kind of people they are today. Limbaugh appeals to the most basic negativity in people and they follow him like obedient little morons. Adolph Hitler was very good at that also and look what happened to him and his followers. To strong a comparison? I think not.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 2:06pm

29. Posted by FRANKGRITS 10/05/2007 @ 2:06pm

    I tend to think of Rush as Joseph Goebels.....

    Wasn't he the "Propaganda Catapulter" for Hitler?

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 10/05/2007 @ 2:44pm

30. Posted by LRJONES4 10/05/2007 @ 1:39pm

    Nice try, Leeroy, but your argument holds no water. We "ant-war" types have been talking about Iraqi corruption for years. If, in fact, "our" guvt had been doing it's job, corruption would have decreased. It has not. The fact that the republicans in these hearings went after Radhi should be of concern to you, they are holding their hands over their ears, not us.

    Waxman has issued many reports describing the corruption. He has openly criticized our "corruption Czar" for NOT doing his job. This Czar has kept some things secret. There is no doubt in my mind that what they want kept secret does not make them look good. Waxman has been belittled by the repubs, and here, for doing what should be done, hold people accountable. But that is considered "anti-war".

    Sorry. Please continue to enlighten me as to the workings of this world you live in.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 2:47pm

31. Please continue to enlighten me as to the workings of this world you live in. --- CW

    I've heard tales of a pleasing pink sky, time running backwards, and the truth being entirely malleable

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 10/05/2007 @ 2:49pm

32. Yes, Clear Channel is all about freedom of opinion. they have no history of squashing those that question the government of George W. Bush.

    I have a bridge for sale. It comes with some prime Palm Springs beach front property. Neo-cons, are you in?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 2:50pm

33. I don't know about Republicans but I can assure you that anyone who understands how democracy works, knows that corruption in a nation's government, its agencies and in its business community, is inimical to its proper formation, functioning and growth.

    Posted by LRJONES4 10/05/2007 @ 1:39pm

    We don't have corruption in our country.

    now you understand why the republicans don't get it.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 2:53pm

34. Posted by DR DECIBELS 10/05/2007 @ 2:49pm

    a world where Saddam hussein and Usama Bin Laden were allies. A world where flying colored horseys will come from the sky bringing love and Armageddon from the One True God.

    A fun place where no oil drilling is allowed in the US, and AL Gore invented Willy Horton.

    A world where democratic witch hunters brought down the good, pure, honest, forgetful Scooter Libby and now they are going after Senator Craig.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/05/2007 @ 2:58pm

35. Posted by DR DECIBELS 10/05/2007 @ 2:44pm

    I'd like to look at Limbaugh's ancestory and family connections around the 30's and 40's.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 3:06pm

36. Posted by CRABWALK 10/05/2007 @ 2:50pm

    Why do you think clear Channel and the neocons are fighting the reinstatement of the Fairness Doctrine so hard?

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 3:08pm

37. Posted by CRABWALK 10/05/2007 @ 2:58pm

    I see nothing wrong with Craig wanting to keep his seat. Afterall, his crime was only a misdemeanor. Who cares if he's a homosexual. So is Barney Frank. Craig holds court with some serious criminals in the Congress, past and present. Until both Houses are cleaned up, (don't hold your breath), Craig should be left alone to finish out his term. Let the people decide.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 3:11pm

38. Posted by JOHN MAASCH 10/05/2007 @ 10:59am

    you don't think god is great?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 10/05/2007 @ 3:15pm

39. Time to learn Chinese.

    Posted by BLUESPARK 10/05/2007 @ 12:41pm

    Sparky, Well said, and I couldn't agree more. P.S We would need to learn Mandarin, not Chinese.

    Posted by Wolfgang1 at 10/05/2007 @ 4:01pm

40. The corrupt perv repubs in congress, while in charge for 12 years, climaxed their tenure by folding our US Constitution for the hsuB/cHeney admin to use as tp. That they fain hypocritical dismay at Radhi's testimony of analogous corruption, is not surprising but rather conclusive of their culpability.

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/05/2007 @ 4:19pm

41. Limbaugh website featured image of Stalin with Media Matters logo on his chest On October 4, Rush Limbaugh's website prominently displayed an image of former Soviet dictator Josef Stalin with a Media Matters for America logo over the left breast pocket of his uniform. The headline above the image read: "Stalinists Have Taken Over the Left," while the caption read, "They've gone beyond ideology to totalitarianism."

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 4:35pm

42. "A fun place where no oil drilling is allowed in the US, and AL Gore invented Willy Horton."

    *snort*

    *chortle*

    Posted by CaptainKirk at 10/05/2007 @ 4:40pm

43. During the first hour of the October 1 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, in response to a Media Matters for America item documenting his recent description of service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as "phony soldiers," Rush Limbaugh said: "I want to apologize to all of the members of the United States military, both in uniform and out, active duty and retired, for Media Matters for America." Limbaugh continued: "They will not apologize to you, and they will not apologize to me. I want to apologize to you on behalf of them." Limbaugh later asserted: "The bottom line to all this is that, last week, with this smear and this phony accusation regarding something I had not said about active duty military personnel, or even those who opposed the war, was that, once again, the integrity of the U.S. military was brought into question when the integrity of the sourcing group, Media Matters for America, should have been brought into question." But Limbaugh has misrepresented his "phony soldiers" comments; indeed, listeners to Armed Forces Network (AFN), which broadcasts only the first hour of The Rush Limbaugh Show, heard only a spliced version of Limbaugh's remarks in which he edited out 1 minute and 35 seconds of discussion, while falsely claiming that he was providing the "entire transcript."

    What's wrong with this picture? Why is AFN (Armed Forces Network) catering to Rush Limbaugh?

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 4:44pm

44. GRITFORBRAINS,

    Rush only got on AFN in the first place because the troops repeatedly requested him, and they only get 1 hour of his daily 3 hour show as it is....As far as I'm concerned, Rush is already being censored by the likes of you...you should be happy about that...(heh,heh)

    Posted by davebarlett at 10/05/2007 @ 5:39pm

45. .(heh,heh)

    Posted by DAVEBARLETT 10/05/2007 @ 5:39pm

    Are you Beavis or Butthead?

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 10/05/2007 @ 5:46pm

46. Or perhaps their love child?

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 10/05/2007 @ 5:49pm

47. Which is it, Davey me boy?

    Posted by Dr Decibels at 10/05/2007 @ 6:14pm

48. Yeah well the Iraqi gov did learn from hsuB/cHeney:

    "However, the Red Cross's findings on U.S. detainee treatment have leaked repeatedly, presumably from opponents of the Administration's interrogation techniques who had access to them. In those reports, the ICRC has consistently and repeatedly asserted that some U.S. techniques amount to torture. ICRC spokesman Florian Westphal declined to comment on the reports but said, "The dialogue between the ICRC and the U.S. on all matters of detention has always been very vigorous. Where we felt that there were things that needed to be addressed, we did so." It's not a minor dispute. Every time Bush asserts that the U.S does not torture, he is not just undermining his own credibility, he's diminishing the Red Cross too. "It's a downward spiral," says Elisa Massimino, Washington director of Human Rights First. "If I'm the ICRC and I'm visiting [abused] prisoners in, say, Egypt, the Egyptians will say 'What are you going to do? The U.S. says this isn't torture.'" Worse, if a dictator in some god-forsaken part of the world captures an American soldier, the U.S. may protest. But it is the Red Cross's assertions of a violation that will be the immediate point of pressure on the captors. "What it virtually guaranteed is that dictatorships will cite the U.S. government's own arguments to defend themselves and that will make it harder for the ICRC and everyone else to condemn and shame those governments," says Tom Malinowski, a spokesman for Human Rights Watch."

    http://tinyurl.com/2gwfam

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/05/2007 @ 6:37pm

49. Hey Frank:

    "And the hits just keep on comin'.

    Listening to Rush at the top of his show today was a feast for the ears for anyone covering the wingnut P.T. Barnum's "phony soldiers" implosion. Straight out of the gate Rush admitted he doctored the tape, proving Media Matters is not only correct but that Rush Limbaugh will do anything to duck the truth. But it gets better.

    Guess why Rush doctored the tape?

    Ready?

    After he said the "phony soldiers" line, he was "vamping" while Mr. Snerdly printed off a transcript. That's right, the broad gap between "phony soldiers" and Rush actually mentioning one, which has become his lying alibi, is all because Limbaugh was "vamping."

    It gets better.

    Immediately after admitting he doctored the tape he went on a full scale wingnut screed against former NATO Supreme Allied Commander and former general Wesley Clark, calling him "Ashley Wilkes," as Rush is known to do. Proving again that whenever a soldier disagrees with Rush or Republicans strategery, no matter how bad, that veteran gets attacked, smeared or swiftboated. No doubt Rush is peeved that Clark wants him off AFR.

    Rush's continual aversion to the truth continued on Monday night's ABC News with Charles Gibson. Via Think Progress:

    (Limpaw): "Not one member of the media, not one congressman, nobody has called our office to ask, "Did you really say this? And what did you mean by it?"

    In fact, MSNBC called Limbaugh for comment, but he stiff armed the request.

    The slurs continued yesterday on Rush's show when he compared VoteVets.org veterans against the war to "suicide bombers."

    So today on and on Rush blathered. He's paddling as fast as he can but he's not getting anywhere."

    http://www.taylormarsh.com/archives_view.php?id=26332

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/05/2007 @ 6:44pm

50. Yep, GOP'ers, just keep tapping along:

    http://www.first-draft.com/2007/10/another-toe-tap.html

    Posted by hsuBfools at 10/05/2007 @ 6:46pm

51. corn, this is the best reporting you've done. thank you.

    the truth is there is no iraqi government. there is the u.s. occupation forces, and the street.

    i only hope god will forgive us one day - and that we have somehow earned that forgiveness - for our heinous crimes against Judge Radhi, his family & friends & co-workers, and the iraqi people as a whole.

    please keep us informed as to mr. radhi's future, such as it is...

    Posted by Scrub at 10/05/2007 @ 7:09pm

52. by "heinous crimes", i realize it is the insurgency or the shia militia or whoever who are brutally murdering and torturing the people involved with mr. rahdi's efforts. but our complicity in all this - and how we are discarding him like oil sludge - is beyond disgusting. no words for it, really.

    Posted by Scrub at 10/05/2007 @ 7:12pm

53. excellent work Mr. Corn. If only the rest of the "liberal media" would pick this story up and broadcast it to the main street republicans. There are many Old School repubs that don't find corruption acceptable.

    Can't wait to read the slander of Judge Rahdi and the defense of Iraqi corruption from our very own neo-cons, who hate to see THEIR hard earned tax money wasted on childrens healthcare when it could be used to prop up an Islamic state.

    I am sure Bill/Hillary did something similar that can be used to defend the Maliki "government".

    Posted by CRABWALK 10/05/2007 @ 10:51am

    Neurons on the blink today Crabs? The "Republicans" didn't know about corruption in Iraq? And they were getting quarterly reports from 3 or 4 years ago? There may not be much Martha Stewart or Enron style corruption in your country but there certainly seems to be a fair bit of lying/self delusion/problems adding 2&2. As I told you before we Aussies might be dumb but stupid we ain't.

    As far as the good judge goes, if you can't get any satisfaction from the neo-cons, why don't you make up your own slander? I'm sure you wouldn't find that a novel or distressing experience.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 10/05/2007 @ 7:54pm

54. Posted by LRJONES4 10/05/2007 @ 1:39pm

    Nice try, Leeroy, but your argument holds no water. We "ant-war" types have been talking about Iraqi corruption for years. If, in fact, "our" guvt had been doing it's job, corruption would have decreased. It has not. The fact that the republicans in these hearings went after Radhi should be of concern to you, they are holding their hands over their ears, not us.

    Waxman has issued many reports describing the corruption. He has openly criticized our "corruption Czar" for NOT doing his job. This Czar has kept some things secret. There is no doubt in my mind that what they want kept secret does not make them look good. Waxman has been belittled by the repubs, and here, for doing what should be done, hold people accountable. But that is considered "anti-war".

    Sorry. Please continue to enlighten me as to the workings of this world you live in.

    Posted by CRABWALK 10/05/2007 @ 2:47pm

    You really do need a lot more work done on you Crabs. I can only assume there is still a bit of Russian in you all, so can only guess that the Czar, you mention, is the IGIR. My suggestion to you is to initially by pass the commentary from Waxman and read your IGIR. Then see if Waxman is having you on or not.

    More generally this investigation, including the contributions by the "Waxmans" and Judge Radhi is just what the doctor ordered, because democracy in Iraq is one of the goals of the neo-cons and the great leader himself. Thus eliminating corruption is a vital cog in achieving that end. (That Repubs challenge Waxman is quite a healthy tactic, which not only helps to identify bullshit, if he is indulging himself, but also strengthens Waxman's claims if they can be shown to stand up when challenged).

    As far as taking so long and seeming to get worse, may I remind your lot that you have been trying to get your soldiers out of Iraq for over four years and it seems to be getting "worse (from your perspective) all the time. You, of all people, should know things like this take time and patience.

    If you read the 4th Oct 07 IGIR report you will notice that, though he paints a sombre picture of the present reality, he does outline some existing positives and a course of action that should be pursued by the Iraqis, particularly those Iraqi organisations that are presently involved in the anti-corruption arm of the government, which if implemented will improve the situation.

    (You of course are not totally unaware of the American companies in Iraq, such as Parsons, that could probably teach the Iraqis a thing or two about corruption, so whatever you may think, it is a human problem not essentially an Iraqi one. What you (the US) have in place are checks and balances and regulation in government and business plus effective law enforcement agencies that make sure the Enrons of your country get the chop. If you didn't have that structure in place you would make Iraq look, in comparison to the US, as corrupt as a bingo night at the local Catholic Church hall. Those structures including relevant laws and effective enforcement are what need, according to the IGIR, to be established in Iraq.)

    Posted by lrjones4 at 10/05/2007 @ 8:51pm

55. Posted by LRJONES4 10/05/2007 @ 8:51pm

    So the system is working you say. It's okay that billions of dollars have gone unaccounted for and little reconstruction has been done. The U.S. government was clearly not designed to build more democracies. Our bureaucracy is just not set up for that purpose and does not function well in that purpose. If Maliki is truly as bad as he is made out by some and the government in Iraq is really this bad, we cannot let Bush and Cheney run the show anymore. We must impeach them and hope that the next administration can undo some of the damage. Also what is this IGIR report you speak of? I can't find it.

    Posted by Waltz at 10/05/2007 @ 9:11pm

56. Posted by MASK 10/05/2007 @ 9:35pm

    So what is it? You think that it's ok for Limbaugh to censor veterans but it's not ok to kick his ass off AFN?

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/05/2007 @ 10:36pm

57. The Federalist Society and ACLU is suing Armed Force Radio (AFR) for removing the Rush Limbaugh show from AFR programming. AFR is a government agency and the first amendment prohibits Congress from making laws that infringe the freedom of speech or freedom of the press.

    I don't agree with Limbaugh's act or his divisive and polarizing polemic but when it comes to free speech and the first amendment, I'm with the Federalist Society and the ACLU.

    Posted by NeilSagan at 10/06/2007 @ 12:12am

58. SO CORRUPTION IS NO BIG DEAL FOR REPUBLICANS...

    Why do I find that so easy to believe? Is it because the current Republican administration is the most corrupt in American history? Is it because the Republicans exported their endemic corruption to Iraq during the U.S. occupation? Hey, just business as usual, right Dick? Right Dubya?

    Posted by w_m_bear at 10/06/2007 @ 12:19am

59. Posted by NEILSAGAN 10/06/2007 @ 12:12am

    WHAT A STUPID ARGUMENT...

    It's been conclusively demonstrated time and again that taking a given personality off the air more or less for whatever reason is in no way an infringement of their freedom of speech. Rush Limbaugh can still say what he damn well pleases when he damn well pleases, and I'm certain he will. If he were being denied ALL access to any media whatever BECAUSE OF HIS VIEWS that would be an infringement of his free speech, but that isn't the case here. It doesn't matter if it's Armed Forces Radio or whatever. Besides, the military itself has the right to vet what its troops read and hear, as well as what they are allowed to say. It's not the same as civilian life by a long shot....

    The ACLU often shoots itself in the foot like this by defending the likes of Rush Limbaugh, who, I am certain, would certainly never return the favor....

    Posted by w_m_bear at 10/06/2007 @ 12:29am

60. Sadly, Rush and his ilk will always have an eager audience in the ranks of those who need to be told what to think.

    Ergo - ditto-heads.

    Posted by CaptainKirk at 10/06/2007 @ 01:14am

61. So the system is working you say. It's okay that billions of dollars have gone unaccounted for and little reconstruction has been done. The U.S. government was clearly not designed to build more democracies. Our bureaucracy is just not set up for that purpose and does not function well in that purpose. If Maliki is truly as bad as he is made out by some and the government in Iraq is really this bad, we cannot let Bush and Cheney run the show anymore. We must impeach them and hope that the next administration can undo some of the damage. Also what is this IGIR report you speak of? I can't find it.

    Posted by WALTZ 10/05/2007 @ 9:11pm

    W,

    You do in fact have a pretty good system, including checks and balances, for picking up and removing the perpetrators of corruption in government and in the private and corporate sectors and it is probably as alive and well under the GW Bush administration, as it was under any other. eg Jack Abramoff at the government level and a Republican to boot and Enron in the corporate sector.

    Your Senate and House Committees also play a role in this process regardless of who is in the WH. The Iraqis in the end will have to do this for themselves. However the US can certainly help in setting up the legal, auditing and enforcement structures needed to control corruption in Iraq.

    Corruption robs the common people of their fair share of the financial cake so you can be sure that Iraqis will be following via TV, radio, newspapers and the internet what is going on in the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, with great interest. That in itself is a powerful didactic on corruption for Iraqis. So these investigations have aother purpose beyond providing fuel for the Bush bashers and guidelines for Iraq.

    This URL for the Oct 4th 2007 SIGIR report:

    http://www.sigir.mil/reports/pdf/testimony/SIGIR_Testimony_07-015T.pdf

    This one for other SIGIR reports:

    http://www.sigir.mil/reports/testimony.aspx

    Posted by lrjones4 at 10/06/2007 @ 01:55am

62. If you read the 4th Oct 07 IGIR report you will notice that, though he paints a sombre picture of the present reality, he does outline some existing positives and a course of action that should be pursued by the Iraqis, particularly those Iraqi organisations that are presently involved in the anti-corruption arm of the government, which if implemented will improve the situation.lrjones

    Of course there are signs of progress in a report by chimpCo. Wouldn't be PRUDENT to be a member of ChimpCo and NOT put signs of progress in your report, real or imagined. Do you think maybe one course of action would have been to keep Judge Radhi in his job? Or defend his family from the insurgents? Instead, your boy Maliki chased him out of the country.

    this is YOUR war, YOUR corruption. Don't try to make it ours. It won't fly.

    However the US can certainly help in setting up the legal, auditing and enforcement structures needed to control corruption in Iraq.

    and that is why people like you and HAPPY should go there and help set these systems up. But you won't, will you?

    Corruption robs the common people of their fair share of the financial cake so you can be sure that Iraqis will be following via TV, radio, newspapers and the internet what is going on in the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, with great interest. That in itself is a powerful didactic on corruption for Iraqis. So these investigations have aother purpose beyond providing fuel for the Bush bashers and guidelines for Iraq.

    Perhaps you could explain why the republicans were so harsh to Judge Radhi? Why do they fight congressional oversight of US corruption tooth and nail?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 08:33am

63. LeeRoy, could you tell me why, if these reports detail ongoing corruption, there has been no action on it from ChimpCo. Why has no funding request come with "benchmarks" for anti-corruption? Why has no funding been cut when the Iraqis are unable to get the corruption under control? Why has Halliburton been able to continue to overcharge the US taxpayer?

    enlighten me, Oh Wise One. For I am confused. IF Chimpy knows about the corruption, why does he do nothing about it? Why will he not work FOR Judge Radhi and get him a free pass into our country?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 08:43am

64. There are still military in Iraq that think we went there to find wmd's, and that we found them. Of course they want to listen to Rush, it feeds their fantasies.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 08:48am

65. How's this for a powerful didactic on corruption:

    "The problem you had in California was caused by a combination of things--an unwise regulatory scheme, because they didn't really deregulate," Cheney said in the May 17 Frontline interview. "Now theey're trapped from unwise regulatory schemes, plus not having addressed the supply side of the issue. They've obviously created major problems for themselves and bankrupted PG&E in the process."

    When asked whether it was possible whether energy companies were behaving like a "cartel" and if some of the high power prices in California could be the result of manipulation, Cheney responded with a resounding "no."

    turns out, the energy "crisis" was created by manipulation by energy companies, including ENRON, Reliant ansd Williams Energy Companies.

    Maybe the Iraqis are learning from their puppet masters.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 09:05am

66. Posted by NEILSAGAN 10/06/2007 @ 12:12am

    Have you ever heard the name Iva Toguri D'Aquino? You probably know her better as 'Tokyo Rose'. She was a broadcaster for the Japanese during WWII who used the airwaves to try to demoralize our troops. She was convicted after the war and sentenced to ten tears and a ten thousand dollar fine.

    Tell me how her vitriol differes from Rush Limbaugh's demoralizing our troops who put their lives on the line and then have to here him call them phoney soldiers as well as unAmerican and unpatriotic just because they disagree with the war they're fighting. These courageous people are doing their duty despite being branded as invested in the defeat of America by a zealous lunatic. This is why General Clark wants him off AFN. True Rush doesn't say outrageous things about the troops in the first hour of his show. That's the only hour that is broadcast to the troops. He usually blows smoke up their asses during that hour. But the truth filters through thanks to the internet which ia available to the troops every day. Rush does have a web site you know. The troops have a lot of down time where they actually do discuss what they find there. Believe me, it's not something that Rush wants. Thank God for the internet.

    I say either get his ass off of AFN or arrest him for broadcasting propaganda to our troops who are defending his right to be an asshole.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/06/2007 @ 09:19am

67. For those of you who don't monitor Limbaugh like Media Matters does and like I personally do, his self defense goes something like this:

    Liberals don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to Bush's courageous fight againt the terrorists so they manufacture false arguments, (phoney soldiers), to try to change the subject for the success we've had in Iraq. liberals are invested in the defeat of America because if we lose in Iraq, they lose the election. They want the terrorists to win, (their are liberal fighting in Iraq and their families are usually liberal too). MoveOn is a Communist group funded by George Soros who wants the destruction of America. The seven troops who wrote to the NYT decrying our efforts in Iraq, (a mischaracterization of what they really said), don't know what they're talking about, (several of them are dead now).

    This is just a small example of what our troops are exposed to by this idiot. Doesn't he realize that his efforts to divide America also causes friction between our troops? Those troops from the south generally like Rush while the those from the rest of the country understand his agenda and laugh at him. General Clark is right in his call to keep Rush from corrupting our troops who have to stay sharp and cannot be distracted by his vitriolic rantings. BTW, their families don't like it either. I know this personally.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/06/2007 @ 09:32am

68. Perhaps you could explain why the republicans were so harsh to Judge Radhi? Why do they fight congressional oversight of US corruption tooth and nail?

    Posted by CRABWALK 10/06/2007 @ 08:33.

    You'd have to ask them but if you really wanted to know if Radhi was on the level wouldn't you want to test him out in the same way? At least they were earning their pay. This is the approach of one of them which seems to me have some merit given that he wants to help the present government beat corruption, presumably, through the measures suggested by your SIGIR and the deliberations of this committee:

    Republican Tom Davis said it is not enough to point out Iraq's culture of corruption.

    "Good government and democrats in Iraq don't need to be lectured by this committee on the extent of corruption in their country," said Congressman Davis. "They need our help in building the structures, policies and processes to fight it."

    Some Republicans had/have doubts about Rahdi's bona fides so that may account for their aggressive approach in committee. It seems that every American involved professionally with Radhi believes that he is above reproach.

    There are quite a few sections of the SIGIR report that mention some Iraqi positives as well as steps, such as more adequate funding and training of Iraqi anti-corruption staff and agencies but space limits us to several. The entire report needs to be read to get these quotes more fully into context but they do show the general tenor of the SIGIR report:

    "Iraq's anti-corruption agencies face significant capacity and resource shortfalls. Enormous training shortfalls exist in the important fields of investigations, audit, and management. The Government of Iraq must remedy the problems of insufficient staffing and inadequate budgets if these institutions are to succeed."

    "Despite these grim challenges, there are some limited signs of progress in Iraq on the anti-corruption front. Investigators and auditors have begun to receive more training. The BSA just completed a World Bank training program in Jordan; and the BSA has organized 57 training programs for more than 800 employees over the past two years. The inspectors general have formed the Iraq IG Organization, and its chairman is conducting assessments of each IG. Of recent note, a Joint Anti-Corruption Council was established this summer within the Office of the Prime Minister, an apparent positive move forward, but one that still requires clearer direction and more robust support from the Prime Minister."

    "Managing the anti-corruption support activities of the various U.S. agencies is complex and requires a clear strategic plan. SIGIR found, however, that no strategic plan for this mission was ever developed. Moreover, there was no program of planned activities, no framework for outlining the roles and responsibilities of participating agencies, and no integrated budget identifying the resources needed for implementation. There exists a recurrent problem with "stove-piping" among the federal agencies working on anticorruption efforts in Iraq; and coordination among military advisors, embassy personnel, and PRT representatives is hampered by staff shortages and organizational disconnects."

    "Despite these largely negative findings, SIGIR did find that the anti-corruption efforts within the Ministries of Defense and Interior are more robust than those within other ministries because of resources provided by the Department of Defense through the Multi-National Security Transition Command (MNSTC-I). The other ministerial IGs share a single U.S. advisor."

    It is an extremely useful report in that it identifies deficiencies and offers solutions, some as radical as new Iraq anti-corruption legislation (some of which is in the legislative pipeline) others that require better use and co-ordination of resources.

    Posted by lrjones4 at 10/06/2007 @ 11:21am

69. "Despite these grim challenges, there are some limited signs of progress in Iraq on the anti-corruption front. Investigators and auditors have begun to receive more training

    Greaaatt News there Leeroy. After 4 1/2 years, things are beginning to have limited signs of progress.

    "Managing the anti-corruption support activities of the various U.S. agencies is complex and requires a clear strategic plan. SIGIR found, however, that no strategic plan for this mission was ever developed. Moreover, there was no program of planned activities, no framework for outlining the roles and responsibilities of participating agencies, and no integrated budget identifying the resources needed for implementation.

    Whose job was it to set up these programs? ChimpCo.

    You are making my points for me LeeRoy. Thanks. Keep up my education.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 12:58pm

70. Now, if Arab countries had a history of corruption, then I would understand ChimpCo's unwillingness to set up ant-corruption efforts years ago. but Arab countries are uncorrupt.

    Buwahahahaha.

    who woulda seen it coming?

    A Franco-Armenian architect who spent years building military cities in Saudi Arabia, asked to describe what that country was like, replied:

    "Money can buy everything."

    And then he added: "Except civilization."

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 1:02pm

71. Isn't this sweet:

    At the time of the 9/11 attacks, members of the Saudi royal family were scattered all over the United States. Some had gone to Lexington, Ky., for the annual September yearling auctions. The sale of the finest racehorses in the world had been suspended after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, but resumed the very next day. Saudi prince Ahmed bin Salman bought two horses for $1.2 million on Sept. 12.

    Go shopping, good advice for all Saudi Billionaire Wahabists. Especially those that are buds with Chimpy McFlightsuit.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 1:10pm

72. Waxman is not stealing anything. He is one of the few that actually give a damn and is not singing just to sing. Do a little research on him and then see if you still think he is full of hot air.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 2:19pm

73. Republican Tom Davis said it is not enough to point out Iraq's culture of corruption. "Good government and democrats in Iraq don't need to be lectured by this committee on the extent of corruption in their country," said Congressman Davis. "They need our help in building the structures, policies and processes to fight it."

    The irony is that the structures, policies and processes supporting corruption were put in place by the U.S. Why would any Iraqi think the U.S. would want to change that? Both Democrats and Republicans, and anyone getting an investment dividend has profited from ongoing military action - somewhere, anywhere in the world.

    The U.S. doesn't manufacture, produce, or make money any other way. U.S. corporations have made more money in Iraq in less than 5 years than they have in two decades. Most of congress benefits from those structures, policies and processes - including Bush, Limbaugh, Waxman, Kerry and Clark.

    War is BIG business.

    Posted by du2vye at 10/06/2007 @ 5:23pm

74. his own brethren.

    Posted by MARKCANYON 10/06/2007 @ 3:02pm

    Name some names. Show me were Waxman has benefitted from Iraqi corruption.

    I am not aware of Waxman being corrupt at all, other than being a career pol. Show me were I am wrong and ya got me.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 5:28pm

75. Posted by FRANKGRITS 10/06/2007 @ 09:32am

    IN ESSENCE, RUSH LIMBAUGH...

    Makes up "facts" to support his illogical arguments....

    I'm starting to believe that conservatism and, especially, neoconservatism in America are actually personality disorders disguised as political perspectives. Because these perspectives seem to me to stem more from a basic attitude towards life -- one that arises out of a wholly selfish disregard for the rights of other people as well as a kind of uncritical worship of militarism in all its guises. It is basically the attitude of the schoolyard bully writ large and propped up with logically flimsy argumentation and made-up "facts" (Limbaugh, Coulter, O'Reilly).

    Posted by w_m_bear at 10/06/2007 @ 6:41pm

76. Posted by MARKCANYON 10/06/2007 @ 5:53pm

    You got me! My name is Mr. Prince.

    damn those meddling kids!

    Some more names:

    Uncle Bucky Bush

    Prince Bandar (Bush)

    More later if you want.

    I am under no illusions about Waxmans sainthood. But I will await your proof of his war profiteering.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 7:49pm

77. I am not aware of Waxman being corrupt at all, other than being a career pol. Show me were I am wrong and ya got me.

    Posted by CRABWALK 10/06/2007 @ 5:28pm

    Crabs I tend to agree with you about Waxman though if you check you will find that he is sponsoring US citizenship etc for Radhi and his family (along with a few other Democrat pollies). I'm not suggesting even a whiff of corruption in that but did think that Waxman has been really impressed with Radhi. That just tends to make me a little cautious that he may be seeing Radhi through rose tinted glasses. Despite that my reading of it, and as far as I can ascertain, is that Rahdi is OK in terms of integrity.

    A contributing factor in Rahdi's position, apart from treading on corrupt toes, may well, have its origin in a personality clash with Maliki and some of his present Iraqi adversaries.

    The important thing of course is to remember that even when Radhi was head of the CPI, corruption was growing in the government so in that context he is not a crucial loss in the fight against corruption in Iraq. My suggestion is that if the Waxman Committee's recommendations are acted upon both by the US administration and the Iraqi government, Rahdi's important contribution will have been as a high profile attention grabber and the fight against corruption will be taken up by other brave Iraqis.

    (Just noticed how you worked out LeeRoy. Very clever, I must say, I thought it was probably a local rabid dog's name. I once noticed LR also sounds like Allah but that would be blasphemous so leeroy it is).

    Posted by lrjones4 at 10/06/2007 @ 8:42pm

78. I find little wrong with Waxman sponsoring someone who put his life on the line collaborating with the US.

    I find a lot wrong that 4 1/2 years on, it is necessary.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:18pm

79. You show me where Mr. McFlightsuit and VP Chainsaw have benefited from Iraqi corruption. Name me names of their brethren who have profited from the Iraq disaster!

    Always happy to oblige when it to comes the misdeeds of the Bush clan:

    Neil Mallon Bush the younger brother of the President, infamous for his involvement in the Silverado S and L scandal, has been hired by Crest Investment Company as a consultant for $60,000 per year to assist with their efforts to serve as a middleman to advise other companies that seek taxpayer-financed business in Iraq. Working with Crest puts Neil Bush at the center of multiple organizations profiting from the war and occupation in close alliance with long-term Bush Family allies.

    Crest Investment is headed by Jamal Daniel who is a principal partner in New Bridge, a Houston, TX based company with offices in Iraq and Kuwait. The main focus of New Bridge is to advise companies that seek opportunities in the private sector in Iraq, including licenses to market products in Iraq. The company highlights that the Coalition Provisional Authority decision to allow foreign companies to establish 100 percent ownership of businesses in Iraq, an unusual arrangement in the Mideast, has added to the attractiveness of the market. The company describes itself by saying:

    " New Bridge Strategies, LLC is a unique company that was created specifically with the aim of assisting clients to evaluate and take advantage of business opportunities in the Middle East following the conclusion of the U.S.-led war in Iraq. Its activities will seek to expedite the creation of free and fair markets and new economic growth in Iraq, consistent with the policies of the Bush Administration. The opportunities evolving in Iraq today are of such an unprecedented nature and scope that no other existing firm has the necessary skills and experience to be effective both in Washington, D.C. and on the ground in Iraq." (See: http://www.newbridgestrategies.com/index.asp ) .

    New Bridge Strategies , is headed by Joe M. Allbaugh, Mr. Bush's campaign manager in 2000 and the director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency until March 2003. Earlier he was Chief of Staff to then-Governor Bush of Texas Other directors include Edward M. Rogers, Jr. vice chairman, and Lanny Griffith, lobbyists who were assistants to President George Herbert Walker and now have close ties to the White House."

    *Neil also famously admitted in court papers that he accepted prostitutes from the Chinese guvt. He just didn't know they were hookers, just random women that happened to knock on his hotel room door.

    ***William H.T. ("Bucky") Bush, an uncle of George W. Bush, joined the board of directors of the St. Louis based company Engineered Support Systems in March 2000. (See: http://www.engineeredsupport.com/) Bucky Bush was one the Bush "Pioneers," the campaign contributors who raised more than $100,000 in the 2000 presidential election. Engineered Support Systems has three areas: light military support equipment, heavy military support equipment, and electronics/automation systems. Since 2000, following the presidential election and the 9-11 attacks, the company's federal contracts, revenues and its stock value have all gone up. Engineered Support Systems has been in the top 100 contractors with the DoD since 2001. It's contracts with the U.S. military have totaled over $1 billion.

    *****William H.T. Bush is also a trustee for the investment firm Lord Abbott, one of Halliburton's top 10 shareholders and also a top-ten mutual fund holder in Halliburton, which has obtained prime contracts in Iraq. Vice President Cheney, the former CEO of Halliburton, still has between $18 million and $87 million invested through Vanguard, another top-ten holder in Halliburton stock.

    ******

    Marvin P. Bush, the youngest brother of George W. Bush, shares an interest in federal contracts held by companies in his firm's portfolio. Marvin Bush is also an adviser at HCC Insurance, formerly called the Houston Casualty Company, one of the biggest insurance carriers for the World Trade Center. Bush was a director at HCC, which has benefited financially from the 9-11 insurance bailout legislation passed by Congress at the instigation of the White House. The departure of Marvin from the HCC board was announced the same day, November 22, 2002, as the passage of the bill.

    Marvin Bush is co-founder and partner in Winston Partners, a private investment firm which is part of a larger firm called the Chatterjee Group. (See http://www.winstonpartners.com/. ) According to SEC filings, the Chatterjee Group consists of Winston Partners, LP; Chatterjee Fund Management, LP; Winston Partners II LDC, a Cayman Islands-based company; Winston Partners II LLC; Chatterjee Advisors LLC; Chatterjee Management Company; Mr. Chatterjee himself; and Furxedown Trading Limited, a company organized under the laws of the Isle of Man. The address for Winston Partners II LDC is in the Netherlands Antilles. The other subsidiaries were organized in Delaware. Governor Jeb Bush is also an investor in the Winston Capital Fund, which happens to be managed by Marvin's firm.

    According to the Sept 30, 2003, issue of Mother Jones, an $80 million Iraq contract was awarded to Nour, a company which began in 2003 with ties to Winston Partners. Nour is an "international investment and development company" with more than 100 employees based in Iraq, and claims expertise in telecommunications, agribusiness, internet development, recruitment, construction materials, oil and power services, pharmaceuticals and fashion apparel."

    In January, 2004, Nour was awarded a $327 million contract to equip the Iraqi armed forces and Civil Defense Corps. However, not long after it was awarded, Nour came under heavy scrutiny because of questions involving the company's president and Ahmed Chalabi, of the US appointed Iraqi Governing Council. Newsday reported, Chalabi received a $2 million "fee" for helping to arrange a $80 million contract, that was actually awarded to a firm called Erinys International "within days" of being granted the contract, Erinys became a joint venture operation with Nour.

    In addition, after the $327 million contract was awarded it was revealed that Nour had no prior experience in providing military equipment. Nour's response was it planned to subcontract its weapons procurement to the Polish firm, Ostrowski Arms – unfortunately, Ostrowski didn't even have a license to export weapons. After these concerns the Army decided to terminate the contract with Nour. This added to the delays in body armor and other equipment that have increased the risks for U.S. soldiers. In May 2004, ANHAM, a joint venture with Nour, based in Vienna, Va., was the winner of a $259-million contract to equip the new Iraqi army and security forces with guns, trucks and other equipment. Nour lists current Iraq projects with the Ministry of Oil, the New Iraqi Army, and Criminal Intelligence in Iraq, Security in Iraq. (See http://www.nourusa.com .

    Now you show me yours.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:30pm

80. Posted by MARKCANYON 10/06/2007 @ 10:30pm

    You might have a point, if they made a shekel off of us bloggers.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:33pm

81. pass the peanuts down to the end of the bar Marky. And the pickled eggs.

    thanks.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:38pm

82. Who are the brethren he is covering for? What is the benefit Waxman receives from the war profiteers for holding hearings on war profiteering and corruption?

    I told you, my name is Mr. Prince. I come from Michigan and am the brother-in-law of Dick DeVoss. You outed me, remember?

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:48pm

83. Posted by LRJONES4 10/06/2007 @ 8:42pm

    I guess I would have more hope if most of the professional class had not already fled Iraq. They are the ones that would help root out corruption.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:51pm

84. Posted by MARKCANYON 10/06/2007 @ 10:49pm

    third or fourth childhood. It's fun. Like you.

    You asked for the names of Chimpies brethren that have profited from the Iraqi disaster. Now you have your knickers all twisted up.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:54pm

85. HAve fun at your end of the bar, Marky. Careful in the mens room, though. Keep a narrow stance. Should be easy with those panties all knotted up like that.

    Posted by crabwalk at 10/06/2007 @ 10:59pm

86. To: Interested Parties

    From: Karl Frisch, Media Matters for America

    Re: Fact vs. Fiction in the Limbaugh "phony soldiers" controversy...

    Date: Friday, October 5, 2007

    Below you will find a brief description of Rush Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comments along with documentation that corrects common misconceptions in the media about the controversy surrounding his remarks and subsequent statements on the subject.

    OVERVIEW

    During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh characterized service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as "phony soldiers." Limbaugh said to a caller that "[t]here's a lot" that people who favor U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "don't understand" and that when asked why the United States should pull out, their only answer is, " 'Well, we just gotta bring the troops home.' ... 'Save the -- keep the troops safe' or whatever," adding, "[I]t's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people." Limbaugh's caller replied, "No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media." Limbaugh interjected, "The phony soldiers." The caller, who had earlier said, "I am a serving American military, in the Army," agreed, replying, "The phony soldiers."

    FACTS vs. FICTION

    FICTION: Limbaugh's comments referred to only one soldier

    FACT: During his September 28 broadcast, responding to criticism of his comments, Limbaugh claimed that rather than speaking generally of soldiers who support withdrawal from Iraq, he was "talking about one soldier with that 'phony soldier' comment." Later in the program, he asserted, "[E]verybody involved in this knows full well I was talking about one genuine, convicted, lying, fake soldier," referring to Jesse MacBeth, who pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs for pretending to be an injured Iraq war veteran. But as the September 26 transcript makes clear, Limbaugh actually referred to "phony soldiers," plural. Responding to the caller's statement that supporters of withdrawal "like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media," Limbaugh responded, "The phony soldiers" [emphasis added].

    FICTION: Limbaugh's comments occurred during a discussion about Jesse MacBeth

    FACT: On the October 2 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom, while purporting to give viewers "some background" on Limbaugh's comments, co-anchor Megyn Kelly reported: "Rush originally used this term 'phony soldiers' when he was talking about a guy named Jesse MacBeth. ... Limbaugh was making the point that this guy was basically a 'phony soldier,' and he was trying to say that sometimes people on the left use 'phony soldiers' like this to make their points." But contrary to Kelly's assertion that "Rush originally used this term 'phony soldiers' when he was talking about" MacBeth, Limbaugh did not mention MacBeth on the September 26 broadcast of his radio show until 1 minute and 50 seconds after he used the phrase "phony soldiers." After Limbaugh used the phrase, the caller he was speaking with went on to discuss the purported presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, with Limbaugh responding. Limbaugh then thanked the caller for calling, and the caller is not heard again on the broadcast. Only after this did Limbaugh bring up MacBeth on his September 26 show.

    FICTION: Limbaugh's comments referred to a group of actual military imposters

    FACT: During his September 28 broadcast, following his repeated assertions that he had been referring to "one soldier," a caller asked, "But you did say 'soldiers' in plural, though, didn't you?" Limbaugh replied: "Yes, because there have been a number of these people, but they were not active duty -- I was not talking about anti-war, active duty troops. I was talking about people who've been exposed as frauds who never served in Iraq but claimed to have seen all these atrocities, [unintelligible]." Limbaugh repeated this explanation during his October 2 broadcast, describing MacBeth as "the man I was referring to and others like him as 'phony soldiers.' " However, this explanation is inconsistent with his statements earlier in his September 28 program -- noted above -- that he had been talking about "one soldier." Indeed, the transcript (subscription required) of the September 28 broadcast that is posted on Limbaugh's website shows him asserting: "I was talking about one soldier with that phony soldier comment, Jesse MacBeth [italics, bold, and underline in original]."

    FICTION: Limbaugh played the "entire" segment to explain his remarks

    FACT: On his September 28 broadcast, Limbaugh purported to air the "entire" September 26 segment in which he referred to "phony soldiers" to prove that "Media Matters ... selectively choose[s] what they want to make their point." In fact, the clip he then aired omitted a full 1 minute and 35 seconds of the 1 minute and 50 second discussion that occurred between Limbaugh's original "phony soldiers" comment and his reference to MacBeth, the full audio of which can be heard here. Prior to airing the edited clip, Limbaugh said: "Here is, it runs about 3 minutes and 13 seconds, the entire transcript, in context, that led to this so-called controversy." After the clip ended, Limbaugh stated: "That was the transcript from yesterday's program, talking about one phony soldier. The truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose, which is exactly the way the website Media Matters generated this story."

    Further, the transcript (subscription required) of his September 28 broadcast posted on Limbaugh's website does not make clear how much time elapsed between Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" remark and his discussion of MacBeth -- or even that it omitted any part of the conversation: Limbaugh's transcript does not provide any notation or ellipsis to indicate that there is, in fact, a break in the transcript of the September 26 clip he used.

    Similarly, during the October 2 edition of Fox News Live, after Fox News aired a brief clip of Limbaugh's September 26 "phony soldiers" comment, Carrie Lukas, director of policy for the conservative Independent Women's Forum, asserted, "If you go on for another, about 30 seconds, you hear Mr. Limbaugh start talking about Jesse MacBeth."

    FICTION: Limbaugh did not call Rep. Jack Murtha a "phony soldier"

    FACT: During the "Strategy Session" segment on the October 2 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, conservative talk show host Bill Bennett claimed that Limbaugh "did not call [Rep.] Jack Murtha [D-PA] a 'phony soldier.' " Bennett asserted that instead, Limbaugh "took Jack Murtha on, on the merits of the argument." In fact, during his September 28 broadcast Limbaugh stated:

    LIMBAUGH: I was talking about a genuine phony soldier. And by the way, Jesse MacBeth's not the only one. How about this guy Scott Thomas who was writing fraudulent, phony things in The New Republic about atrocities he saw that never happened? How about Jack Murtha blanketly accepting the notion that Marines at Haditha engaged in wanton murder of innocent children and civilians?

    According to Murtha's biography on his congressional website, Murtha joined the Marines in 1952 and volunteered for service in Vietnam, where he was awarded the Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.

    FICTION: Limbaugh didn't compare wounded Iraq vet to suicide bomber

    FACT: On his October 4 radio show, Limbaugh asserted that he "didn't call" wounded Iraq veteran Brian McGough "a suicide bomber" on his October 2 show and said he was "grateful" for McGough's service. McGough appeared in an ad released by VoteVets denouncing Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comment. In the ad, McGough says to Limbaugh, "Until you have the guts to call me a 'phony soldier' to my face, stop telling lies about my service." Limbaugh said on October 2: "[T]his is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran, lying to him about what I said, then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media in a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into." Several media outlets have noted Limbaugh's comments, reporting that Limbaugh compared or likened McGough to a suicide bomber, including the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, and ABCNews.com. Further, FoxNews.com reported that "Limbaugh decried the ad by the group that he linked to MoveOn.org, figuratively saying VoteVets is treating McGough like a suicide bomber."

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/07/2007 @ 12:55am

87. Go to mediamatters.org and read the lies of those on the right, twisting themselves into pretzels while trying to defend Limbaugh. They must really need this guy for some reason.

    Posted by frankgrits at 10/07/2007 @ 12:59am

88. i think flaying limbaugh for this 'phone soldier' is...well...phony. a bunch of BS. and i say this from the left.

    so, Rush is an American fascist. the liberal/left hates this of course, but can't stop him, can't out entertain him, can't get a hold of his audience and influence them, and this makes them stay up late at night.

    they latch onto a bunch of BS - where Rush is just referring to a couple of rogues who had spoken out in the moderate/liberal/left press - and now we thing we've "caught him". nice. all we do is increase his stature among his followers, drive up his ratings, get him practically a medal from the halls of Congress, and in the process of all this turn him into a self-righteous martyr. nice. nice work on the liberal/left, as always. what a bunch of clowns. they wouldn't know how to take on American fascism if it showed up at their door with a salute.

    meanwhile, moveon.org is praised for its Petraeus/Betray US stand. what a bunch of crap. first they call the Commander of Iraq 'Judas', then they come on the Ed Schulz Show (Air America) and claim it's "not personal". what a bunch of crap. calling someone 'Judas' - the military commander no less, whether true or not - and then saying it's "not personal". these people can't be trusted. would u want to jump into a foxhole with someone who calls someone 'Judas' and then says it's "not personal"? didn't think so. then they whine like mamas when the Congress calls their BS, crying all the way to the bank by raising money off of it. nice. make it worse for all of us (they helped to ruin the Petraues debate; what a bunch of clowns), and then ask for more money. with friends like them, we might as well toss in the towel.

    dylan has said for 40 years to beware the "liberal secular humanists". why? because a) at least you know where you stand with a fascist; b) a "lib sec humanist" will call u "judas" (as they did him), and then say it's "not personal"; and c) they have no faith. can't trust them. in fact, they only make it worse.

    anyway, that doesn't leave many options. maybe we can get the psychopath to put impeachment back on the table. until then, save your money and for the love of God stop turning Rush Limbaugh into a martyr....

    Posted by Taboo at 10/07/2007 @ 06:47am

89. Posted by TABOO 10/07/2007 @ 06:47am

    You couldn't be more wrong. As I've pointed in several posts, Limbaugh has a long history of slandering the