By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer

INDIANAPOLIS - Barack Obama likened Hillary Rodham Clinton to President Bush for threatening to “totally obliterate” Iran if it attacks Israel and called her gas-tax holiday a gimmick as he tried to fend off her challenge ahead of two pivotal Democratic primaries.

Clinton, in turn, stood by both her comment on Iran and her tax proposal as she gave chase to the front-runner in Indiana and North Carolina.

The competitors squabbled over the issues — one foreign, one domestic — from a short distance, first during separate appearances on Sunday news shows and then as they courted voters for Tuesday’s primaries.

“This is the final push,” Clinton told a cheering crowd of volunteer canvassers in Fort Wayne, emboldened by her Pennsylvania victory two weeks ago as well as polls that show her in a close race in Indiana and narrowing Obama’s lead in North Carolina.

Obama, for his part, was hoping that wins Tuesday would stop the bleeding from a difficult campaign stretch. Maneuvering for advantage, he sought to portray Clinton as politically motivated on both Iran and her gas-tax plan.

On NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Obama opened a new line of criticism and seized on an answer Clinton gave when asked last month what she would do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons on her watch.

“I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran,” Clinton said April 22 in an interview with ABC. “In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them.”

Obama said, “It’s not the language we need right now, and I think it’s language reflective of George Bush.”

Suggesting that his rival was a political opportunist, Obama added: “Senator Clinton during the course of the campaign has said we shouldn’t speculate about Iran, we’ve got to be cautious when we’re running for president, she scolded me on a couple of occasions on this issue, yet a few days before an election, she’s willing to use that language.”

Clinton, asked on ABC’s “This Week” about Obama’s criticism, said she had no regrets about her comment.

“Why would I have any regrets? I’m asked a question about what I would do if Iran attacked our ally … and, yes, we would have massive retaliation against Iran,” Clinton said. “I don’t think they will do that, but I sure want to make it abundantly clear to them that they would face a tremendous cost if they did such a thing.”

Turning up the heat on an issue closer to home, Obama on NBC called Clinton’s proposal for a gas-tax holiday this summer a “classic Washington gimmick” that wouldn’t solve anything and would save only $28 for each person. He opposes the temporary suspension of the federal tax and argued that Clinton was pandering for votes.

To underscore that, Obama rolled out a new TV ad for Indiana and North Carolina that derided “Clinton gimmicks that help big oil.”

“More low-road attacks from Hillary Clinton. Now she’s pushing a bogus gas-tax gimmick. Experts say it’ll just boost oil industry profits,” the ad says. “Clinton aides admit it won’t do much for you — but would help her politically.”

Clinton dismissed the criticism and disputed Obama’s suggestions that she and Republican candidate John McCain were the same because they both support a gas-tax holiday.

“Senator McCain has said take off the gas tax, don’t pay for it, throw us further into deficit and debt. That is not what I’ve proposed,” Clinton told ABC, adding that she wants the oil companies to pay the gas tax instead of consumers this summer.

Many economists oppose the plan and Clinton demurred when asked to name one who supports it. “I’m not going to put my lot in with economists because I know if we did it right … it would be implemented effectively,” she said.

Focusing on Indiana, Clinton and Obama nearly tripped over each other throughout the day. They stayed overnight in Indianapolis hotels one block apart. They were greeting voters within miles of each other in Fort Wayne. By evening, they planned to return to the capital city for the Indiana Democratic Party’s Jefferson Jackson Dinner.

North Carolina, too, was to get some last-minute attention. Both candidates shuffled their schedules to dart back to the state on Monday, reflecting the tightening contest there

Obama is ahead in the hunt for convention delegates — 1,742.5 to 1,607.5, according to an Associated Press count Sunday — but he has faced a spate of troubles over the past month. That has Clinton sensing an opening. Still, the delegate math works in Obama’s favor, and it will be difficult for Clinton to overtake him.

Nevertheless, Clinton suggested anew she had no intention of dropping out, saying on ABC, “When the process finishes in early June, people can look at all the various factors and decide who would be the strongest candidate” to go up against McCain in the fall.

Bush Confesses to Waterboarding. Call D.C. Cops!

NEW YORK–”Why are we talking about this in the White House?” John Ashcroft nervously asked his fellow members of the National Security Council’s Principals Committee. (The Principals were Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Colin Powell, CIA Director George Tenet and Attorney General Ashcroft.)

“History will not judge this kindly,” Ashcroft predicted.

“This” is torture. Against innocent people. Conducted by CIA agents and American soldiers and marines. Sanctioned by legal opinions issued by Ashcroft’s Justice Department. Directly ordered by George W. Bush.

An April 11th report by ABC News describes how CIA agents, asked by previous presidents to carry out illegal “black ops” actions (torture and killings), had become tired of getting hung out to dry whenever their dirty deeds were revealed by the press. When the Bush Administration asked the CIA to work over prisoners captured in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere, Director George Tenet demanded legal cover. The Justice Department complied by issuing a classified 2002 memo, the so-called “Golden Shield,” authored by Office of Legal Counsel Jay Bybee. “Enhanced interrogation techniques”–i.e., torture–were legal, Bybee assured the CIA.

Tenet was a good boss, a CYA type. He wanted to protect his agents. So he got the Principals to personally sign off on each act of torture.

“According to a former CIA official involved in the process,” ABC reported, “CIA headquarters would receive cables from operatives in the field asking for authorization for specific techniques.” Can we beat up this guy? Can we waterboard him?

The Bushies weren’t otherwise known for dwelling on details. Osama was in Pakistan; they invaded Afghanistan instead. Two years later, he was still in Pakistan. They invaded Iraq. Bush and his top officials still found time to walk through every step of torment a detainee would suffer in some CIA dungeon halfway around the world.

“The high-level discussions about these ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ were so detailed, [Bush Administration] sources said, some of the interrogation sessions were almost choreographed–down to the number of times CIA agents could use a specific tactic. These top advisers signed off on how the CIA would interrogate top Al Qaeda suspects–whether they would be slapped, pushed, deprived of sleep or subjected to simulated drowning, called waterboarding, sources told ABC news.”

Bush knew.

Not only did he know, he personally approved it. He likes torture.

“Yes, I’m aware our national security team met on this issue,” he confirmed. “And I approved.”

When the U.S. signs a treaty, its provisions carry the full force of U.S. law. One such treaty is the U.N. Convention Against Torture, of which the U.S. is a core signatory. As Philippe Sands writes in his new book “Torture Team:” Parties to the… Convention are required to investigate any person who is alleged to have committed torture. If appropriate, they must then prosecute–or extradite the person to a place where he will be prosecuted. The Torture Convention… criminalizes any act that constitutes complicity or participation in torture. Complicity or participation could certainly be extended not only to the politicians and but also the lawyers involved…”

George W. Bush has publicly confessed that he ordered torture, thus violating the Convention Against Torture. He, Cheney, Rumseld, Rice and the other Principals must therefore be arrested and, unlike the thousands of detainees kidnapped by the U.S. since 9/11, arraigned and placed on trial.

Because the torture ordered by Bush and his cabinet directly resulted in death, they must additionally be charged with several counts of murder. Fifteen U.S. soldiers have been charged with the murders of two detainees at the U.S. airbase at Bagram, Afghanistan in 2002. They were following orders issued by their Commander-in-Chief and his Principals.

One of the Bagram victims was Dilawar, a 22-year-old Afghan taxi driver. “On the day of his death,” reported The New York Times on May 22, 2005, “Dilawar had been chained by the wrists to the top of his cell for much of the previous four days. A guard tried to force the young man to his knees. But his legs, which had been pummeled by guards for several days, could no longer bend… Several hours passed before an emergency room doctor finally saw Mr. Dilawar. By then he was dead, his body beginning to stiffen. It would be many months before Army investigators learned a final horrific detail: Most of the interrogators had believed Mr. Dilawar was an innocent man who simply drove his taxi past the American base at the wrong time.”

At least four detainees have committed suicide at the torture camp created by George W. Bush after 9/11 at Guantánamo Bay. Twenty-five more made 41 unsuccessful attempts to kill themselves. The conditions of their confinement–ordered by Bush and his Principals–constitutes torture. It no doubt prompted their deaths.

If George W. Bush were an ordinary citizen, there can be little doubt that he would face a long prison sentence for the scores of acts of torture he authorized both specifically and generally. Four of the seven white hillbillies charged with the kidnap-torture of a black woman in Logan County, West Virginia are now in jail for at least the next ten years.

If Bush weren’t president, he would face murder charges. The maximum sentence in a federal murder case is death.

If Bush and his co-conspirators are not above the law, if the United States remains a nation where all citizens are equal, they must be arrested and indicted. But by whom?

The Supreme Court has never resolved the question of whether a sitting president can be arrested by civilian authorities. Even if he were charged and convicted, many legal experts say he could issue himself a pardon.

However, leaving the presidency in the hands of an self-admitted torture killer is unacceptable. Congress could ask a U.S. Marshal to arrest Bush as part of impeachment charges. But the ultimate outcome–removing him from office a few months before the end of his term–seems woefully inadequate given the nature of the charges. In any case, Democrats have already said that impeachment is “off the table.”

Bush could be extradited to one of the countries where the torture and murders were committed–such as Afghanistan or Cuba. But he could claim immunity as a head of state.

There is, however, a person who could begin holding Bush and the others accountable for their crimes.

She is Cathy L. Lanier, the 39-year-old chief of D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department. Chief Lanier, take note: you have probable cause to arrest a self-confessed serial torturer and mass murderer within the borders of the District of Columbia. He resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Go get him.

History is calling, Chief Lanier. Your city, and your country, needs you.

(Ted Rall is the author of the book “Silk Road to Ruin: Is Central Asia the New Middle East?,” an in-depth prose and graphic novel analysis of America’s next big foreign policy challenge.)
[Source: Yahoo News]

By MATTHEW LEE, Associated Press Writer

ZAGREB, Croatia - President Bush celebrated NATO’s expansion into former communist territory on Saturday and urged further enlargement, highlighting differences with Moscow hours before final talks with outgoing Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Bush congratulated the Eastern European nations of Croatia and Albania for the invitations to join NATO that they won this week at the military alliance’s summit in Bucharest, Romania. He urged a similar welcome for Macedonia, which snagged on Greek objections. The president reinforced that message immediately after his speech in a public square here by honoring the newest members of NATO’s club over lunch.

Bush called the invitation to join NATO “a vote of confidence that you will continue to make necessary reforms and become strong contributors to our great alliance.”

“Henceforth, should any danger threaten your people, America and the NATO alliance will stand with you and no one will be able to take your freedom away,” he said to cheers from an audience of thousands packed into St. Mark’s Square, used as the site of the inauguration of every Croatian leader for the past 700 years and considered “the center of Croatian politics.”

Such praise for the spread of democracy on Russia’s doorstep — and for the promise of Western military protection for that freedom — was not likely to be cheered in Moscow, however. Bush’s focus on freedom comes as his administration continues to harshly criticize increasing Kremlin authoritarianism.

So, even as Bush has sought in recent days to downplay tensions between the United States and Russia, he used his overnight stay in Croatia, as well as one in the former Soviet republic of Ukraine earlier in his weeklong trip, to showcase some of the differences that have caused those tensions.

By evening Saturday, Bush was to be at Putin’s summer home at the Black Sea resort of Sochi. The two are to cap an often contentious seven-year relationship that will come to end when Putin leaves office next month. They hope to produce a new “strategic framework” to guide relations to a less rocky future beyond their time in office.

Over dinner and again in talks Sunday, Bush and Putin are expected to make nice and emphasize the positive, such as the strategic framework and Russia’s agreement this week to allow shipment of nonmilitary NATO supplies to Afghanistan through its territory.

But the U.S. plan to deploy a missile shield in Europe is a major source of friction between the two countries. Though the concept is vehemently opposed by Russia, it won NATO leaders’ full support this week.

And the U.S. desire to see NATO open the admission process for Ukraine and Georgia also roils Russian officials. The ex-Soviet republics’ aspirations to become part of the alliance were snubbed at this week’s NATO summit, a victory for Putin. But Bush and his aides have been quick to point out that alliance leaders vowed to eventually open the path to joining, possibly as early as December. Putin’s victory, they say, may be short-lived.

Bush did not directly tweak Russia in his speech, and while advocating further NATO enlargement, he never mentioned Ukraine and Georgia. But he included themes that could rankle.

Bush pointed out the success of U.S.-supported democratization in the volatile Balkans, where the effects of the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia still roil relations between Washington and Moscow. Most recently, the United States and many of its European allies rallied around independence for the Serbian province of Kosovo. Russia, supporting Serbia, strongly opposed that, too.

Bush also discussed the importance of security and stability in the Balkans, noting that at their summit in Romania, the NATO leaders offered “intensified dialogue” to Bosnia and Montenegro, two other states once part of Yugoslavia.

“The NATO alliance is open to all countries in the region,” he said. “We hope that, soon, a free and prosperous Serbia will find its rightful place in the family of Europe and live at peace with its neighbors. With the changes under way in this region, Europe stands on the threshold of a new and hopeful history.”

Bush received little enthusiasm for his plug for Serbia, another ex-Yugoslav country. Croatia declared independence in 1991 but then fought a war with its rebel Serbs who opposed it. The crowd gave only subdued applause to his talk of the importance of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Croatia has troops in Afghanistan, but not Iraq.

Croatia’s former nationalism once made Washington wary, and the U.S. did not recognize its independence until 1992. The country later drew Bush administration ire by opposing the U.S.-led war in Iraq and refusing to allow U.S. soldiers exemption from war crimes prosecution. But Croatia’s emergence as a stable nation in the turbulent region, the pro-Western government it elected in 2000 and its contribution in Afghanistan more recently has earned it U.S. support.

“We stand together as one free people,” Bush said.

There was little chance of an unfriendly crowd for Bush, as invitations to his speech were given to the Croatian government to distribute. Indeed, he was welcomed warmly, with people spilling into side streets to hear him and applauding frequently. A long-stem rose was thrown on stage as he arrived, and people hugged and kissed him as he left.

“It’s a great honor for our homeland,” said Nikola Petir, a 66-year-old technician who came with his 18-year-old son, Marko. “We are a small nation — I think we’ll have more support from the world after his visit.”

But hundreds of anti-war demonstrators protested Friday night upon Bush’s arrival. And on Saturday, dozens gathered peacefully at Flowers’ Square in downtown Zagreb. They had been invited to sign a giant postcard for Bush, “as a message from the people who would not have been among the chosen ones at the St. Mark’s Square,” said Tomislav Bosanac, one of the organizers. Over a picture of Croatia on the postcard, there was a handwritten message: “Please don’t come back.”

Bush also met Saturday with Croatian Prime Minister Ivo Sanader, promising improved trade relations and the easing of travel restrictions.

___

Associated Press writers Snjezana Vukic and Terence Hunt contributed to this report.

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent

BUCHAREST, Romania - President Bush suffered a painful diplomatic setback Wednesday when NATO allies rebuffed his passionate pleas to put former Soviet republics Ukraine and Georgia on the path toward membership in the Western military alliance.

The decision, to be made final on Thursday, was sure to be cheered by Moscow, which heatedly opposes NATO’s eastward expansion.

In another sign of discord, Greece blocked Macedonia’s request to join the 26-nation alliance because of a dispute over its name. Only Croatia and Albania will be invited as new members.

It was a sour outcome for Bush at his final NATO summit as he sought to polish his foreign policy legacy. Instead, he wound up sidetracked by opposition and splits among European allies. It was a result that was foreshadowed by public statements from France and Germany but Bush nevertheless put his prestige on the line and even made a stop in Ukraine on Monday to argue his case.

“We are convinced that it is too early to grant both states the (pre-membership) status,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel said as she arrived in Bucharest for the summit. It only takes one NATO member to block a decision, because policy-making is reached by consensus.

Bush was counting on the summit to strongly endorse plans for an anti-missile shield in Europe despite once-heated objections from Moscow.

The summit’s opening dinner ran two hours longer than scheduled as the discussion went around the table, with each leader making his or her case. The White House expressed confidence that NATO would give a strong statement of support for its mission in Afghanistan and that a number of countries would pledge additional troops.

Bush, going into the talks, said he was “optimistic that this is going to be a very successful summit.”

Diplomats said the alliance would offer a statement saying NATO’s door will remain open if Ukraine and Georgia move ahead with political and military reforms and build support for NATO among their citizens.

Afghanistan loomed as the summit’s No. 1 topic, a point of contention between some Europeans who see the NATO mission as largely a humanitarian effort and the Bush administration and others who see it as a central front in the fight against terrorism.

Canada had threatened to pull its troops from the front lines in southern Afghanistan unless other allies sent an additional 1,000 combat troops to help.

NATO has about 47,000 troops in Afghanistan, but commanders are pleading for more troops in the south, where Taliban insurgents are wreaking the most havoc. The United States supplies the largest contingent, about 14,000 for NATO, plus the United States has 13,000 operating separately in eastern Afghanistan hunting terrorists and training Afghan forces.

“We expect our NATO allies to shoulder the burden necessary to succeed” in Afghanistan, Bush said a midday news conference with Romania President Traian Basescu on a Black Sea beach.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has offered a battalion — normally about 700 to 800 troops — for the volatile eastern region, NATO spokesman James Appathurai said, reporting on the dinner. That would free up U.S. troops to move south. Appathurai said the offers on the opening day of the summit would meet Canada’s demands.

To make up for other allies, Bush has pledged to send an additional 3,200 Marines to Afghanistan. The White House on Wednesday said the actual number would be 3,500.

Bush hailed NATO’s expected endorsement of missile defenses.

“It looks like to me that the ingredients are coming together where that could be a distinct possibility,” Bush said. “And that would be a very important statement because NATO could assure its members and the people within NATO that there would be defenses available to prevent a Middle Eastern nation, for example, from launching a strike which could harm our security.”

The U.S. worries most that Iran could someday launch such as missile.

NATO chief Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, talking with Bush before the summit, said NATO would “take a clear position on missile defense, recognizing the threat and working on the answers to that recognized threat.”

De Hoop Scheffer also said the alliance would publish a “vision statement” about NATO’S long-term commitment to Afghanistan. “We should not forget that we are on one of the front lines in a fight against terrorism in Afghanistan,” he said.

Taking note of the dispute over Ukraine and Georgia, de Hoop Scheffer said before the dinner: “I think this can never be a question of `whether.’ The `whether’ is not questionable. If these nations fulfill the criteria, and if they want to enter — want to enter themselves through NATO’s open door, I think that door should be open.”

A senior U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the leaders’ meeting was private, said the Bush administration would still consider the summit a success if NATO makes clear that the door to membership remains open. The debate, according to the official, is whether the Bucharest meeting was the right time to settle the question about Ukraine and Georgia.

The alliance is due to invite Croatia and Albania to join, but Greece is pledging to veto Macedonia’s bid unless there is a last-minute agreement to change the candidate country’s name. Greece says that implies a claim on its northern region, also called Macedonia.

“Until the name issue is resolved there cannot be consensus” on Macedonia’s bid, Appathurai said.

“I feel good about what I’m hearing from my fellow leaders about their desire to support Afghanistan,” the president said after meeting with de Hoop Scheffer. “I think if tomorrow we get clarification on troop support … the people of Afghanistan are going to be more than grateful.” He did not mention any specific numbers of additional troops.

Bush plans to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Sunday in the resort city of Sochi, the last such session of their presidencies. Bush is also to meet with Putin’s hand-picked successor, Dmitry Medvedev.

The White House is holding out hopes of an agreement easing Russia’s opposition to a missile shield.

Bush said Putin should not fear NATO, but rather should welcome the alliance because it “is a group of nations dedicated to peace.”

___

Associated Press writer Paul Ames contributed to this report.

By TERENCE HUNT, AP White House Correspondent
WASHINGTON - President Bush said Friday that the flare-up in violence in oil-rich southern Iraq and parts of Baghdad presents “a defining moment in the history of a free Iraq” as the government there seeks to root out Shiite militias.

Bush made clear that the United States stands firmly behind Iraqi security forces and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. “He made the decision to move and we’ll help him,” the president said.

“It’s going to take awhile, but it’s a necessary part of the development of a free society,” Bush said at a White House news conference with visiting Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. At the same time, the president said the situation in Iraq remains “dangerous and fragile.”

His comments followed U.S. airstrikes in both the southern city of Basra and in a Shiite militia stronghold in Baghdad. The renewed violence came as tensions rose among followers of radical Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr angry over a crackdown that has threatened to unravel a militia cease-fire.

“Basra has been a place where criminality has thrived,” Bush said. “They are fighting some pretty tough characters … and yes, there’s going to be violence, and that’s sad.”

He said the resurgent violence would not alter his determination to continue his administration’s mission there.

“Any government that presumes to represent the majority of people must confront criminal elements or people who think they can live outside the law. That’s what’s taking place in Basra and other parts of Iraq,” Bush said. “I would say this is a defining moment in the history of a free Iraq.”

“There have been other defining moments up to now, but this is a defining moment, as well,” Bush said. He said the decision to move troops into Basra was testimony to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki’s leadership capabilities.

“This is a good test for them,” the president said.

“I’m confident we can succeed unless we lose our nerve,” he added. “It’s going to take a while for them to deal with these elements. ”

Bush also suggested that his Iraq policy was working because “troops are coming out.”

The new Australian prime minister campaigned on a theme of withdrawing Australian troops from Iraq. Bush brought up Rudd’s Iraq stance himself in his opening remarks.

Asking and answering his own question, Bush said he expected a journalist to ask him, “Aren’t you mad at the prime minister for fulfilling his campaign pledge? The answer is no.”

“I always like to be in the presence of somebody who does what he says he’s going to do. … This is a guy who meant it. … He consulted closely with his friends. His military commanders consulted closely with our military commanders,” Bush said.

The president noted, however, that Australia continues to have troops in Afghanistan and is helping to train Iraqi farmers in dry-land farming.

For his part, Rudd said, “We’re in Afghanistan for the long haul.”

The two leaders were asked about civil unrest in Tibet and China’s crackdown there and both urged China’s leaders to meet with representatives of the Dalai Lama to discuss the violence.

“It is absolutely clear that there are human rights abuses in Tibet,” Rudd said. “It’s clear-cut; we need to be upfront and absolutely straight about what’s going on.”

Bush said he told Chinese President Hu Jintao this week that “it’s in his country’s interest” that top Chinese leaders meet with representatives of the Dalai Lama, Tibet’s exiled spiritual leader.

“We urge restraint,” Bush said.

On relations with Australia, said he expects them to “strengthen and endure” under Rudd.

“I don’t see differences when it comes to foreign policy,” Bush said. Even so, both worked to smooth over Australia’s decision on Iraq.

Bush called Rudd a “straightforward fellow”and Rudd called the president “George” and joked with Bush about being from Queensland in northeast Australia, which has similar terrain as Texas.

Rudd said that after he asked Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki how Australia could help in nonmilitary ways, his country decided to send $165 million to Iraq, the bulk of which will go to help train Iraqis on dry-land farming.