<div style="margin: 12px 0px; font-family: arial; color: #333333; background: #ffffff; border: solid 4px #e5e5e5; width: 100%; clear: left;"><div class="CM_CTB_Content_Wrap" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;background-color: #ffffff;"><div style="border-bottom: solid 1px #dcdcdc; white-space: nowrap; margin-bottom: 8px; background-color: #eeeeee ;background-image: url(http://www.clipmarks.com/images/source-bg.gif); background-repeat: repeat-x; height: 24px; line-height: 24px; vertical-align: middle; padding-bottom: 4px; color: #666666; font-size: 10px;" ><a href="http://clipmarks.com/clip-to-blog/" title="see clips that are hot right now"><img src="http://content.clipmarks.com/blog_embed/c5fe2713-39ac-4e32-bcc5-9054955281bb/796EA6A1-6F10-4199-917D-E2AF5FB7730B/" alt="" width="19" height="19" border="0" style="vertical-align: middle; margin: 0px 4px; display: inline; border: none; float:none;" /></a>clipped from <a title="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/16/AR2007061601002.html?nav=rss_print/outlook" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/16/AR2007061601002.html?nav=rss_print/outlook" style="font-size: 11px;">www.washingtonpost.com</a></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/16/AR2007061601002.html?nav=rss_print/outlook"><P>The June 10 front-page article "Military Envisions Longer Stay in <A target="" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html/Iraq?tid=informline">Iraq</A>" provided much useful information regarding a planned long-term <A target="" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/related-topics.html/U.S.+Armed+Forces?tid=informline">U.S. military</A> occupation in Iraq, but it failed to give a reason why 40,000 or more U.S. troops might be there for decades.</P></blockquote><div style="height: 2px; font-size: 2px; background: #dcdcdc; border-bottom: solid 1px #f5f5f5; margin: 2px 4px;"></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/16/AR2007061601002.html?nav=rss_print/outlook"><P>The answer is surely oil interests. Last month Congress passed a bill continuing funding for the Iraq war with a "benchmark" provision threatening suspension of reconstruction funds if Iraq's government fails to enact a law opening up its oil industry to privatization, something no other oil-rich Middle Eastern country has done. Predictably, this idea is vigorously opposed by many in the Iraqi parliament and the oil workers union.</P></blockquote><div style="height: 2px; font-size: 2px; background: #dcdcdc; border-bottom: solid 1px #f5f5f5; margin: 2px 4px;"></div><blockquote style="text-align: left; padding: 0px 8px; margin: 4px 0px 8px 0px; background: transparent; border: none;" cite="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/16/AR2007061601002.html?nav=rss_print/outlook">No one should be shocked to learn that U.S. elites plan a long military presence in Iraq on behalf of oil interests; </blockquote></div><div style="margin: 0px 6px 6px 4px;"><table style="font-size: 11px;border-spacing: 0px;padding: 0px;" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tr><td style="background:transparent;border-width:0px;padding:0px;">&nbsp;</td><td align="right" style="background:transparent;border-width:0px;padding:0px;width:107px" width="107"><a href="http://clipmarks.com/share/796EA6A1-6F10-4199-917D-E2AF5FB7730B/blog/" title="blog or email this clip"><img src="http://content6.clipmarks.com/images/c2b-foot.png" border="0" alt="blog it" width="107" height="17" style="border-width:0px;padding:0px;margin:0px;" /></a></td></tr></table></div></div>

New from the makers of Clipmarks:  Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!