Oregon Daily Emerald
Friday, October 22, 2004
NEWS STAFF
(541)346-5511
FEN SUDICK
EDITOR IN CHIEF
STEVEN R. NEUMAN
MANAGING EDITOR
FARED I’ABEN
AVISF1A YAHYA
NEWS EDITORS
PARKER UOWEU.
SENIOR NEWS REPORTER
MORIAFT BAFJNGFT
MEGUANN CUNIFF
KARA HANSEN
ANTHONY LUCERO
CANELA WOOD
NEWS REPORTERS
CLAYTON JONES
SPORTS EDITOR
ION ROETMAN
SENIOR SPORTS REPORTER
STEPHEN MILLER
BRIAN SMITH
SPORTS REPORTERS
RYAN NYBURC
PULSE EDITOR
NATASHA CHIL1NGERIAN
SENIOR PULSE REPORTER
DAHVI FISCHER
AMY LICHTY
RYAN MURPHY
PULSE REPORTERS
DAVID JAGERNAUTH
EDITORIAL EDITOR
JENNIFER MCBRIDE
AILEE SLATER
CHUCK SLOT1IOWER
TRAVIS WILLSE
COLUMNISTS
ASHLEY GRIITIN
SUPPLEMENT
FREELANCE EDITOR
GABE BRADLEY
NEWS FREELANCE EDITOR/
CNFCTOR OF RECRUITMENT
DANIELLE HICKEY
PHOTO EDITOR
IAUREN WIMER
SENIOR PHOTOGRAPHER
HM BOBOSKY
PHOTOGRAPHER
NICOLE BARKER
PART TIME PHOTOGRAPHER
F.RIK BISHOFF
PARTTIME PHOTOGRAPHER
RRLT FURTWANCLER
GRAPHICS EDITOR
KIRA PARK
DESIGN EDITOR
ELLIOTT ASBURY
CHARLIE CALDWELL
DUSTIN REESE
DESIGNERS
SHADRA BEESLEY
JEANNIE EVERS
COPY CHIEFS
KIMBERLY BLACKFIELD
PAUL THOMPSON
SPORTS COPY EDITORS
AMANDA EVRARD
AMBER LINDROS
NEWS COPY EDITORS
LINDSAY BURT
PULSE COPY EDITOR
ADRIENNE NELSON
ONLINE EDITOR
SLADE LEESON
WEBMASTER
BUSINESS
(541) 346-5511
IUDY RIEDL
GENERAL MANAGER
KATHY CARBONE
BUSINESS MANAGER
REBECCA CRITCHEIT
RECEPTIONIST
NATHAN POSTER
A1BINC GUO
ANDREW LEAHY
IOHN LONG
MALLORY MAHONEY
HOLLY MISTELL
DISTRIBUTION
ADVERTISING
(541)346-3712
MELISSA GUST
ADVERTISING DIRECTOR
TYLER MACK
SALES MANAGER
ALEX AMES
MATE BETZ
HERON CAUSCH-DOLEN
MEGAN HAMLIN
ELISA JESSOP
MAEGAN KASER-LEE
MIA LE1DELMEYER
EMILY PHILBIN
SHANNON ROGERS
SALES REPRESENTATIVES
KELLEE KAUFTHEIL
AD ASSISTANT
CLASSIFIED
(541) 346-4343
TRINA SHANAMAN
CLASSIFIED MANAGER
KATY GAGNON
SABRINA GOWETTE
LESLIE STRAIGHT
KERI SPANGLER
KATIE STRINGER
CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING
ASSOCIATES
PRODUCTION
(541)3464381
MICHELE ROSS
PRODUCTION MANAGER
TARA SLOAN
PRODUCTION COORDINATOR
JENCRAMLET
KRISTEN DICHARRY
CAMERON GAUT
ANDY HOLLAND
DESIGNERS
The Oregon Dally Emerald is pub
lished daily Monday through Fri
day during the school year by the
Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing
Co. Inc., at the University of Ore
gon, Eugene, Ore. The Emerald
operates independently of the
University with offices in Suite
300 of the Erb Memorial Union.
The Emerald is private property.
Unlawful removal or use of
papers is prosecutable by law
Chalabi makes spy game a reality
The president got an unusual
endorsement Tuesday; Hasan
Rowhani, the head of Iran’s secu
rity council, told local media that
Tehran’s best interest is served by
the re-election of George W.
Bush. Does it seem strange that a
member of the “axis of evil”
would support our current ad
ministration? Not if you under
stand the circumstances sur
rounding our attack on Iraq.
When future historians write
about this war, 1 suspect they will
sum it up like this: In the year
2003, neoconservatives within the
Bush Administration were duped
by an Iranian double agent into
attacking Iraq and removing Sad
dam Hussein in order to pave the
way for a pro-Iran, Shia-controlled
Iraq. It was one of the greatest
acts of espionage ever perpetrated
against the superpower.
Who is this Iranian double
agent? His name is Ahmed Chal
abi, the founder of the anti-Sad
dam Iraqi National Congress
(INC). The CIA now knows that
the INC was either a front for, or
had deep links to, Iranian intelli
gence and that Chalabi was pass
ing U.S. secrets to Tehran. How
was Chalabi getting ahold of our
secrets? The neocons in the Bush
Administration were giving our
DAVID JAGERNAUTH
CRITICAL MASS
secrets to him!
Who were these neocons?
Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wol
fowitz, Richard Perle and Dick
Cheney, to name a few. Their
plans for the invasion of Iraq did
not begin after the Sept. 11 terror
ist attacks or even when they
took office in 2001. It began in
1997 when they founded the
nonprofit organization Project for
the New American Century.
The neocons laid out their vi
sion for “American global leader
ship” (i.e. world domination) in
their Statement of Principles on
June 3, 1997. They wrote: “It is
important to shape circum
stances before crises emerge”
(i.e. military preemption); to
“promote freedom abroad” (i.e.
occupy totalitarian regimes); and
to institute the “Reaganite policy
of military strength and moral
clarity” (i.e. kill Muslims).
In January 1998, members of
the Project wrote to President
Clinton, urging him to “remove
Saddam Hussein’s regime from
power.” They argued that he was
responsible for a destabilized
Middle East that was putting
American troops, Israel, moderate
Arab states and oil in jeopardy.
Clinton rejected their argu
ment, choosing a policy of con
tainment over regime change.
Containment was effective in
keeping WMDs away from Sad
dam, but sanctions were helping
to keep him in power by weaken
ing resistance movements. This
angered the neocons. Once they
realized that the Project couldn’t
be achieved with Clinton in pow
er, plans were set in motion to
steal the 2000 election.
Or so I suspect. There is no
smoking-gun proof of this, but if
you look at that list of Project sig
natures back in 1997, you will
find Jeb Bush’s name right next to
Dick Cheney. Could it only be a
coincidence that the voter fraud,
which ultimately won Bush (and
more importantly Cheney) the
White House and ensured the im
plementation of the Project, oc
curred in the state headed by Jeb
Bush, a signatory to the project?
Maybe. But I doubt it.
Even before the neocons hi
jacked America, Ahmed Chalabi
was their handpicked, pro-U.S.
puppet leader primed to assume
power through “democratic”
elections after Iraq’s liberation.
Chalabi was the primary, if only,
source for the administration’s
false claims that Saddam pos
sessed weapons of mass destruc
tion and connections to al Qaeda.
He was feeding the administra
tion (and The New York Times, it
turns out) the disinformation
they wanted to hear. Bush, the
neocons and the media took Cha
labi’s chum like a bunch of
chumps, ignoring our own intelli
gence officers who were suspi
cious of Chalabi and his claims
from the very beginning.
Chalabi’s lies became the un
contested truth after the Sept. 11
terrorist attacks. The United King
dom’s The Guardian newspaper
reports that an Iranian spy (not
Chalabi) warned the United
States of the impending attacks
but was not believed. If true, that
means Iran knew about the at
tacks and, perhaps, even helped
to plan and/or finance them. The
9-11 Commission confirmed that
Iran has had connections to al
Qaeda since 1991.
Iran might have foreseen that
the attacks would provide a cata
lyst for the invasion of Iraq. And
now Iran has exactly what they
wanted: Saddam is gone and Iraq
is up for grabs.
If you are afraid Bush will send
us to war against Iran, I’ve got
news for you: We already are. The
majority Shia population of Iraq is
attacking our troops everyday.
They are being supported by Iran
— which is 90 percent Shia —
because Tehran wants an ally in
the Middle East to help them
spread their version of fundamen
talist Islam and increase interna
tional terrorism.
To summarize: Bush’s foreign
policy decisions were actually be
ing controlled by Iran through
Chalabi. Bush allowed an Iranian
spy to access high-level U.S. se
crets that more than likely ended
up in the possession of al Qaeda
terrorists. Hundreds of our troops
died doing Iran’s dirty work, and
now they are killing more Ameri
cans everyday without conse
quence in a power struggle over
Iraq.
Is there any wonder why Iran
supports the re-election of George
W. Bush?
davidjagemauth@
dailyemerald. com
Columnists endorse their presidential picks
Chuck Slothower - John Kerry (D)
I voted for John Kerry for president be
cause the presidency of George W. Bush
has been an unmitigated disaster. It
would be enough to vote against Bush
because he invaded a foreign nation un
necessarily. It would be enough to vote
against Bush because he has sided with
business interests over the environment
at every opportunity. It would be enough
to vote against Bush because he contin
ues to nominate right-wing ideologues to
the federal bench. Put all these reasons
together, and this election is a no-brainer
for those with brains.
Jennifer McBride - John Kerry (D)
The majority of the last two years, my
father has been unemployed. For me, the
main factors deciding this election are eco
nomic. John Kerry's public service pro
grams have the potential to create more
jobs rather than more tax cuts. Small busi
nesses will benefit from Kerry's proposed
health care credits, and if there are tax cuts,
they will generally be spread among those
vulnerable classes who need it the most.
Even if Kerry spent every day in France,
sipping champagne and ignoring the coun
try altogether, I think the United States
would still come out ahead compared to
another four years of George Bush's alter
native for America.
Ailee Slater - John Kerry (D)
John Kerry is my choice for president
for one reason: civil liberties. Throughout
his term, Bush has made severe dents in
the rights of women, starting with an ear
ly move as president to limit overseas
funding to family planning services that
discussed the idea of abortion with
clients. Apparently Bush doesn’t like the
idea of logic, which obviously says that
ending access to preventive birth control
and education will probably lead to more
abortion. Whereas Bush virtually ignores
the issue of civil rights completely, Kerry
discusses his support of affirmative ac
tion and enforcement of justice for all
victims of hate crimes. Re-electing Bush
does not in fact mean another four years;
with his justices on the court, Bush’s
conservative, archaic social ideas could
last for decades.
TYavis Willse - John Kerry (D)
President Bush’s record across a wide
gamut of issues is spotty enough that un
decided voters of nearly any political
stripe or interested in nearly any issue
can find reason to support someone else
for president. Three years after the Sept.
11 terrorist attacks, the Department of
Homeland Security and the nation’s in
telligence agencies are a messy, under
funded spaghetti of poor communica
tion. The war in Iraq, however viable its
premises, is spinning its wheels,
no thanks to the absence of a co
herent exit strategy. His adminis
tration — which admittedly inher
ited an unsustainable economy
and the beginnings of a recession
has nonetheless seen a 177 percent in
crease in long-term unemployment. Nev
er mind that the White House’s 2005
budget proposal would create a $5.2 tril
lion deficit over the next decade ($18,000
for every person living in America to
day). Speaking as a fiscal conservative,
then, John Kerry’s economic record may
not be stellar, but Bush’s is simply dis
mal. But Kerry’s most important qualifi
cation is his evident ability to see an is
sue for the complexities it actually
possesses, rather than succumbing to the
myopia of chasing policy goals without
considering the consequences of that
pursuit. John Kerry is the better candi
date for many reasons, maybe the most
compelling of which is that he isn’t Bush.
INBOX
Dear Student Body,
Every year, all finance constituents of the Associated
Students of the University of Oregon meet to facilitate
open communication and foster goal setting. Our retreats
are an opportunity for your student leaders to learn the
processes that govern our student organizations. These re
treats consist of all-day workshops and team-building ac
tivities.
Unfortunately, attendees of this year’s retreat misrepre
sented the University. It is regrettable that a few people
chose to illegally consume substances after our evening
workshops had concluded. We deeply apologize for the
actions of a few participants that have negatively impacted
the reputation of the University.
In addition, we apologize for not carrying our profes
sional demeanor throughout the extent of the retreat, as
this reflects poorly on everyone. Those elected and hired
are holding themselves accountable and taking a proac
tive approach to deal with this issue and ensure that this
doesn’t happen again. We have been in contact with the
director of Student Judicial Affairs and have planned to
take responsibility for our actions.
We would like to reassure you that this will not affect
our abilities as leaders, as we are still deeply committed
to representing the interests of all incidental fee-paying
students. We understand that these actions have drawn
negative attention from the public, but rather than view
this as a setback, we choose to use this as an opportunity
to show you we are still worthy and capable of our leader
ship roles.
Respectfully yours,
2004 Finance Retreat attendees
OREGON DAILY EMERALD LETTERS POLICY
Letters to the editor and guest commentaries are encouraged, and should be sent to fetters@dailyemerald com or submitted at the Oregon Daily Emerald office, EMU Suite 300. Electronic
submissions are preferred. Letters are limited to 250 words, and guest commentaries to 550 words. Authors are limited to one submission per calendar month. Submissions should
include phone number and address forvenfication The Emerald reserves the right to edit for space, grammar and style. Guest submissions are published at the discretion of the Emerald.
ONLINE POLL
THIS WEEK’S POLL RESULTS
Is the United States appropriately addressing the war on ter
rorism? (66 votes)
1. Yes - The Department of Homeland Security and the
USA Patriot Act have made Americans safer. 21.2 percent
2. Yes - Imprisoning Saddam Hussein was worth invading
Iraq, even if there were no weapons of mass destruction.
7.6 percent
3. No — Invading Iraq has drawn the focus away from more
important goals in the war on terrorism. 24.2 percent
4. Yes - The United States has done more harm than good
and has indirectly helped foster more terrorist activities.
45.5 percent
5. Undecided -1.5 percent