In 2005's waning days, Washington, D.C., Beltway developments pointed to 2006 as a pivotal year for American democracy.

The most far-reaching of these was George W. Bush's aggressive advocacy of his program of secret domestic spying by the National Security Agency (NSA).

The only way the program can't be construed as a clear violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is if the president has the authority to override any law. And this is precisely Bush's claim.

Given that Bush and his cabal have predicted that their War on Terror may last up to 100 years, the president is actually claiming that the rule of law need not apply for several generations.

Bush is proclaiming the right as "wartime president" to do anything he likes. Anything. Hey, why not disband Congress? (Hmmm.) Why not suspend the 2008 election?   more »

There are only two weapons in the imperial tool-chest; force and deception. The brutal colonial occupation of Iraq has provided us with a lavish example of the former, but the twin-axel of deception is more abstruse and difficult to pin down.

Sure, there’s the flagrant propaganda that floods right-wing radio and political talk shows, but that tells us little about the state-sponsored disinformation-programs that permeate every area of American life.

We now know that the Bush administration authorized massive illegal spying operations and is actively engaged in planting pro-American stories in the foreign press.

These suggest that the administration’s overall theory of information management is much more extensive then originally imagined.

In fact, news and information manipulation is at the forefront of Bush’s war on terror, a comprehensive strategy to control of every bit of information a citizen hears, sees or reads from cradle to grave. It is information warfare on a scale that would make George Orwell cringe.   more »

How long will the United States maintain a large deployment of troops in Iraq? That is now the central question of George W. Bush’s second term. Until recently, the Bush administration answered with an evasive cliché: “as long as it takes and not one day longer.” But not anymore.

The ice began to crack on November 17, when Representative John Murtha, a hawkish Democratic congressman and marine veteran, suggested pulling troops out of Iraq in six months.

Soon after, the Republican-controlled Senate voted for “a significant transition to full Iraq sovereignty in 2006.” After initial resistance, Bush began to change his rhetoric by suggesting that a troop drawdown would occur sooner than previously expected.

The erosion in public support for Bush’s Iraq policy is stark. Fifty-four percent of Americans now say that the US erred in sending troops, up from 24% at the start of the war in March 2003. In part, this reflects the rising casualty rate, with more than 2,100 American soldiers killed thus far.

But it also reflects a growing belief that the war is failing. As Duke University’s Peter Feaver, an expert on public opinion who is now serving as a White House advisor, recently pointed out, Americans will tolerate casualties when they believe that a war is just and has a reasonable prospect of success.

But citizens now doubt both these points. The administration is paying the price for overselling the reasons for the war and bungling the post-invasion occupation. Not surprisingly, Bush’s new rhetoric stresses that he has a “strategy for victory.”   more »

The Lib-Dem leader's laid-back manner helped establish his popularity - now his accusers see it as a fatal weakness,

A leader at bay is a bloody sight. There has been nothing edifying in recent weeks about watching Charles Kennedy being slowly torn limb from limb by his (usually anonymous) colleagues and the media hounds.

Westminster loves to be the Colosseum, hunting down political leaders as if they were villains or big game.

What has the man done? He has done pretty well, increasing the number of Liberal Democrat MPs to 62, and making his party the biggest it has been in parliament and local government in living memory. That may not be quite good enough. Yet who knows if anyone else could have done better?

He is a decent man, with a decent view of the world. If he drinks too much, it's probably not as much as Winston Churchill: running a war inebriated is rather more risky than a small, mild-mannered, anti-war party.

Certainly, Churchill never sought help. But there it is, the man is at bay and drink is only a small part of his problem. What was lethal was the news that some dozen of his key frontbenchers had signed his execution warrant, the letter calling for his departure.   more »

Russia is not alone in treating energy security as the means of, or motive for, imperial-style endeavours.

The quest for influence over oil and gas reserves underlies much recent western intervention in the Middle East and has driven high-profile political developments in Latin America, central Asia and elsewhere.

We need to recognise this energy imperialism as a fact of the modern world. For only by recognising it can we find ways to soften its nastier elements.

There are two forms of modern energy imperialism. The first, typified by Russia, involves producers using their leverage over supplies or energy transport systems to influence political outcomes.

Most memorably, Opec, the Middle East-dominated oil producers' cartel, tried this by restricting oil supplies in the 1970s, aimed partly at shifting western policy towards the region.

Today two Latin American producer states are using energy as a tool in standing up to the "imperial" west.   more »

Bush is more or less a symbol, but I think the people around him are the most dangerous administration in American history.

I think they're driving the world to destruction. There are two major threats that face the world, threats of the destruction of the species, and they're not a joke.

One of them is nuclear war, and the other is environmental catastrophe, and they are driving toward destruction in both domains.

They're compelling competitors to escalate their own offensive military capacity—Russia, China, now Iran. That means putting their offensive nuclear missiles on hair-trigger alert.

The Bush administration has succeeded in making the United States one of the most feared and hated countries in the world. The talent of these guys is unbelievable. They have even succeeded at alienating Canada. I mean, that takes genius, literally.   more »

The United States remains far and away the greatest military power on Earth. But Iraq has brutally revealed the limits of American "hard power."

The 2003 invasion will go down in the textbooks for the brilliance of its execution. But despite spending $5 billion a month, and 140,000 troops on the ground, the United States can not ensure stability or security in Iraq.

Instead, Iraq has stretched the United States' all-volunteer military close to the breaking point. Washington intends to cut that force by a third this year. In truth, it has no choice.

Yes, the Pentagon can send unmanned drones to kill al-Qaida operatives on the furthest frontiers of Yemen and Pakistan.

But the major U.S. military operations against Iran, three times larger than Iraq, or even little Syria -- that seemed all too likely after the triumphant march on Baghdad -- are now virtually inconceivable.

So much for U.S. "hard power" that was supposed to impose a Pax Americana on the world, stretching into the 21st century as far as the eye could see.   more »

Charles Kennedy was fighting for his political life last night after admitting he was being treated for alcoholism and calling a leadership election.

The Liberal Democrat leader was forced into his gamble to head off media revelations about an alcohol problem that has been rumoured at Westminster but which he has consistently denied.

He suffered another blow to his authority when it emerged that 11 of his 23-strong shadow cabinet had signed a private letter saying he had lost their support and his position had become untenable. That could prove more damaging than his disclosure that he had been fighting alcoholism for the past 18 months.

Mr Kennedy's decision to urge his critics to "put up or shut up" threw the spotlight on potential challengers.

Some MPs said Mr Kennedy would be "dead meat" if a challenger emerged, which would trigger a postal ballot among the party's 75,000 members.   more »

5 JANUARY

Sharon: The Slaughterer's Long, Brutal Career Ends

Tom Englehardt: Bush Defines the Imperial Presidency

John Pilger: We're Living Under a Tyranny

Bob Herbert: Pity the Poor Immigrant

Brainwashed, Bubble-Wrapped America

Sharon's Stroke: "A Gift From God"

Thomas Friedman: The NYT's Apologist for Neoliberalism

IMF Invades Iraq with "Market Forces"...Gas Prices Soar