"The U.S. military has long sought an agreement with Baghdad that gives American forces virtually unfettered freedom of action, casting into doubt the Bush administration's current claims that their demands are more limited," concludes the National Security Archive's analysis of recently declassified documents. In a 2003 cable, then-Coalition Provisional Authority head Paul Bremer wrote that any agreement with the future government of Iraq must give U.S. forces authority "to detain, intern, and interrogate"; "to retain custody of current POWs / detainees / internees"; and "unlimited authority to conduct military operations." Bremer added that U.S. personnel, including military contractors, "must be accorded ... full criminal immunity and immunity from civil process for official acts." In related news, the Wikileaks website has published what it says is "a sensitive U.S. military counterinsurgency manual." The document points to U.S. involvement in El Salvador and elsewhere in describing how to control foreign populations. Suggested tactics include martial law, censorship, psychological operations, supporting "civilian self-defense forces" and persuading "individuals among the general populace to become informants," by using as motives "civic-mindedness, patriotism, fear, punishment avoidance, gratitude, revenge or jealousy, financial rewards."

Dick CheneyThe Bush administration has long held that overly-aggressive interrogation methods used on detainees in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay were the work of a few "bad apples." Now, an investigation being conducted by the Senate Armed Services Committee has revealed that William Haynes II, General Counsel for the U.S. Department of Defense, sought the advice of military psychologists within a Pentagon agency to design the interrogation techniques. The Committee's findings add to mounting evidence that the detainees' torture resulted from decisions made at the highest levels of government, particularly within the office of U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney.

As the Center for Media and Democracy reported previously, the Sierra Club / Clorox deal -- where Clorox uses the Big Green environmental group's name and logo to sell its "Green Works" line of cleaning products, in exchange for Clorox paying Sierra Club "an (undisclosed) percentage of sales" -- is quite controversial. But it's brought in the green for Clorox. Advertising Age reports that "Green Works sales are estimated at $20 million, the product has gotten exposure on 'The Oprah Winfrey Show' and 'The Ellen DeGeneres Show,' and Clorox has raised its volume forecast five times." Meanwhile, the Sierra Club has been slammed by members and non-members alike. Green Works "brand manager" Mark Kohler dismisses the criticism as "misinformation." Kohler says the negative press has been "frustrating" for Clorox, and AdAge advises marketers to "carefully review both sides of a relationship" before launching a corporate / non-profit partnership. But Clorox appears to be profiting handsomely, while four Sierra Club chapters actively opposed the deal, which -- according to some accounts -- was a factor in the Sierra Club's suspension of its Florida chapter.