Politics, Everyday, All day... morning, noon and night....

All things outside of Burning Man.
Locked
Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Post by Simply Joel » Mon Jun 21, 2004 12:15 pm

June 20, 2004
Love Our Technology, Love Us

By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN

BEIJING

If anti-Americanism is on the rise around the world, no one told the kids in the student visa line at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing. The quest among Chinese students for visas to study in America, say U.S. Embassy officials, has become so intense that it has spawned Internet chat rooms, where Chinese students swap stories about which arguments work best with which U.S. consular officials and even give them names like "Amazon Goddess," "Too Tall Baldy" and "Handsome Guy."

Just how closely Chinese students strategize over the Internet on how to get visas to America — at a time when fewer are being given for security reasons — was revealed to the embassy recently when on one day one consular officer had scores of students come through with the same line, which some chat room had suggested would work: "I want to go to America to become a famous professor." After hearing this all day, he was surprised to get one student who came before him and pronounced, "My mom has an artificial limb and I want to build a better artificial leg for my mom and that is why I want to study in the U.S." The consular officer was so relieved to hear a new line that he told the young man: "You know, this is the best story I've heard this morning. I really salute you. I'm going to give you a visa."

You guessed it. The next day every other student who showed up at the embassy said he or she wanted to go to America to learn how to build "a better artificial limb for my mother." Said one U.S. official: "We have to be so careful what we say, because it gets into the chat rooms right away."

Hearing stories like this, you have to wonder: are Bush officials right when they dismiss all of this talk that President Bush has made America more unpopular in the world now than at any other time in postwar history? Do people really hate us? Don't those visa lines say otherwise? This is worth a closer look.

To begin with, there a few "technical" reasons why anti-Americanism generally does not have the same edge in Asia as in Europe and the Middle East. Asia's leaders, as a group, have much more legitimacy than leaders in the Arab world, either because they have come to power through free elections or because they have delivered on their core promise to their people of economic growth. Because of that, they don't need to demonize America regularly to deflect their people's anger from them. Also, Asia generally is focused like a laser on economic development — and countries like China see investment and technology transfer from America as critical to their growth. "People in Asia do not hate the United States," Singapore's elder statesman, Lee Kuan Yew, said to me. "Big countries like China and India are focused right now on their economic development and they see in America an enormous well to draw technology and economic growth from."

But here's the problem: Young people want American education and technology more than ever, but fewer and fewer want to wear our T-shirts anymore — want to be identified as "pro-American." As one former U.S. diplomat in Beijing put it to me: "They want to cherry-pick us, not line up with us. We've lost prestige."

The idea of America as the embodiment of the promise of freedom and democracy — not just of technology and high living standards — is integral to how we think of ourselves, but it is no longer how a lot of others think of us. They are now compartmentalizing. The unilateral war in Iraq, the postwar mess there, the walk-away from Kyoto and other treaties, the Abu Ghraib scandal have taken a toll. The idea of America as embodying the charisma of democracy has been damaged. As the political theorist Yaron Ezrahi put it, "America as the do-gooder has been hurt, but America as the goods-doer is still there."

Fortunately, this situation is not irreparable. The longing for an America that exports hope, not fear, and that is an example of the best global practices and values, runs really deep in the world. In fact, it is one reason that some people abroad are so angry with President Bush — because they blame him for taking that America away from them. I'm convinced a different approach or different administration would elicit a big response from the world. But for now, we will pay a price, because when people want to line up for our visas but not for our policies, it means Americans alone will have to bear the burden and the price of those policies.

That is not good for us. When you lose your status as a power with values, you weaken your ability to fight those powers without values.
Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Asking for a blackeye, and then complaining after he gets it

Post by Simply Joel » Mon Jun 21, 2004 2:58 pm

Clinton rages at BBC for quizzing him over Monica

LONDON (AFP) - Former US president Bill Clinton (news - web sites) lost his temper during a BBC interview after being repeatedly asked if he was genuine in voicing regret over his affair with Monica Lewinsky.

Clinton, revving up a publicity campaign ahead of the release Tuesday of his memoirs, bristled at relentless questioning about the affair with the White House intern by veteran BBC interviewer David Dimbleby, according to British newspapers.

The Times said Monday that Clinton, known for being media savvy and cheerful in public, let out a rant that lasted several minutes.

"As outbursts go, it is not just some flash that is over in an instant. It is something substantial and sustained," said a BBC executive who viewed the interview, according to the Sunday Telegraph.

The weekly said Clinton then branched out into an attack on media intrusion into the private lives of public figures.

Britain's public broadcaster will air the Clinton interview Tuesday, in step with the release of his much-awaited memoirs.

While the book recounts key global events of the charismatic Clinton's two-term presidency -- Kosovo, the Middle East, Somalia -- public interest in the 957-page tome has focused on the Lewinsky affair, one of the "old demons" that nearly brought down the world's most powerful man.

In leaked excerpts of the book and interviews ahead of its release, Clinton describes the Lewinsky affair as a moral failing, says he worried about losing the love of his daughter Chelsea and confesses that his marriage was salvaged by a year of intensive marital counseling.
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

spectabillis
Posts: 3527
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 11:07 pm
Burning Since: 2020
Location: black rock city

Re: Asking for a blackeye, and then complaining after he get

Post by spectabillis » Mon Jun 21, 2004 4:43 pm

Simply Joel wrote:Clinton rages at BBC for quizzing him over Monica
The weekly said Clinton then branched out into an attack on media intrusion into the private lives of public figures.
Normal press behaviour from the Brits, nothing to get upset over since he should have forseen that.

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Mon Jun 21, 2004 5:14 pm

I just wish immoral Bill would go away...I hate the timing of this self-interested book tour...what's so ridiculous about the crowd that bashes Ralph for destroying Gore in 2000 is the fact that Bill's bad behaviour probably cost Gore more votes than 2 Ralphs would have....good thing Michael More's film arrives this Friday!
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Mon Jun 21, 2004 7:56 pm

New Information Shows Bush Indecisive, Paranoid, Delusional
By TERESA HAMPTON
Editor, Capitol Hill Blue
Jun 17, 2004, 08:47


The carefully-crafted image of George W. Bush as a bold, decisive leader is cracking under the weight of new revelations that the erratic President is indecisive, moody, paranoid and delusional.
“More and more this brings back memories of the Nixon White House,” says retired political science professor George Harleigh, who worked for President Nixon during the second presidential term that ended in resignation under fire. “I haven’t heard any reports of President Bush wondering the halls talking to portraits of dead Presidents but what I have been told is disturbing.”

Two weeks ago, Capitol Hill Blue revealed that a growing number of White House aides are concerned about the President’s mental stability. They told harrowing tales of violent mood swings, bouts with paranoia and obscene outbursts from a President who wears his religion on his sleeve.

Although supporters of President Bush dismissed the reports as “fantasies from anonymous sources,” a new book by Dr. Justin Frank, director of psychiatry at George Washington University, raises many similar questions about the President’s mental stability.

"George W. Bush is a case study in contradiction," Dr. Frank writes in Bush On The Couch: Inside the Mind of the President. "Bush is an untreated ex-alcoholic with paranoid and megalomaniac tendencies."

In addition, a new film by documentary filmmaker, and frequent Bush critic, Michael Moore shows the President indecisive and clearly befuddled when he learned about the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

While conservative critics who have not yet seen Fahrenheit 9/11 dismiss the work as an anti-Bush screed, Roger Friedman of the normally pro-Bush Fox News Network has seen the film and calls it “a tribute to patriotism, to the American sense of duty — and at the same time a indictment of stupidity and avarice.”

Friedman also says the films “most indelible moment” comes when Bush, speaking to a group of school kids in Florida, is first informed of the 9/11 attacks.

“Instead of jumping up and leaving, he instead sat in front of the class, with an unfortunate look of confusion, for nearly 11 minutes,” Friedman says. “Moore obtained the footage from a teacher at the school who videotaped the morning program. There Bush sits, with no access to his advisers, while New York is being viciously attacked. I guarantee you that no one who sees this film forgets this episode.”

Dr. Frank says the episode is typical of how Bush deals with death and tragedy. He notes that Bush avoids funerals.

“President Bush has not attended a single funeral - other than that of President Reagan. In my book I explore some possible reasons for that, whether or not it is "presidential". I am less interested in judging his behavior on political grounds than I am in thinking about its meaning both to him and to the rest of us,” Dr. Frank says. “He has spent a lifetime of avoiding grief, starting with the death of his sister when he was 7 years old. His parents didn't help him with what must have been confusing and frightening feelings. He also has a history of evading responsibility and perhaps his not attending funerals has to do with not wanting to see the damage his policies have wrought.”

In his book, Dr. Frank also suggests Bush resents those in the military.

“Bush's behavior strongly suggests an unconscious resentment toward our own servicemen, whose bravery puts his own (nonexistent) wartime service record to shame,” he wrote.

Supporters of President Bush dismiss Frank’s book as the work of a Democrat who once headed the Washington Chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, but his work has been praised by other prominent psychiatrists, including Dr. James Grotstein, Professor at UCLA Medical Center, and Dr. Irvin Yalom, MD, Professor Emeritus at Stanford University Medical School.

Dr. Carolyn Williams, a psychoanalyst who specializes in paranoid personalities, is a registered Republican and agrees with most of Dr. Frank’s conclusions.

“I find the bulk of his analysis credible,” she said in an interview. “President Bush grew up dealing with an absent but demanding father, a tough mother and an overachieving brother. All left indelible impressions on him along with a desire to prove himself at all cost because he feels surrounded by disapproval. He behavior suggests a classic paranoid personality. Additionally, his stated belief that certain actions are 'God's Will' are symptomatic of delusional behavior.”

Ryan Reynolds, a childhood friend of Bush, concurs.

“George wanted to please his father but never felt he measured up, especially when compared to Jeb,” Reynolds said.

Dr. Williams wonders if the Iraq war was not Bush’s way of “proving he could finish something his father could not by deposing Saddam Hussein.”

But Bush's desire to please his father may have backfired. Former President George H.W. Bush has remained silent publicly about the war, saying he will only discuss it with his son "in private." Close aides say that is because he disapproves of his son's actions against Iraq.

"Former President Bush does not support the war against Iraq," says former aide John Ruskin. "It is as simple at that."

While current White House aides and officials would not allow their names to be used when commenting about Bush’s erratic behavior, others like former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill confirm concerns about Bush’s mood swings.

O’Neill says Bush was moody in cabinet meetings and would wander off on tangents, mostly about Saddam Hussein and Iraq. Bush, O’Neill says, seemed more focused on Iraq than on finding Osama bin Laden and would lash out at anyone who disagreed with him.

Harleigh says it is not unusual for White House staffers to refuse to go public with their concerns about the President’s behavior.

“We saw the same thing in the Nixon years,” he says. “What is unusual is that the White House has not been able to trot out even one staffer who is willing to go public and say positive things about the President’s mental condition. That says more than anything else.”

Dr. Frank, the Democrat, says the only diagnosis he can offer for the President’s condition is removal from office.

Dr. Williams, the Republican, says she must “reluctantly agree.”

“We have too many unanswered questions about the President’s behavior,” she says. “You cannot have those kinds of unanswered questions when you are talking about the leader of the free world.”

© Copyright 2004 by Capitol Hill Blue
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Mon Jun 21, 2004 8:55 pm

check out Caligula in Demetrius and the Gladiators, starring Victor Mature



GW bears an uncanny resemblance to Caligula both in behaviour and looks


weird
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Re: Asking for a blackeye, and then complaining after he get

Post by Simply Joel » Tue Jun 22, 2004 4:07 am

spectabillis wrote:
Simply Joel wrote:Clinton rages at BBC for quizzing him over Monica
The weekly said Clinton then branched out into an attack on media intrusion into the private lives of public figures.
Normal press behaviour from the Brits, nothing to get upset over since he should have forseen that.
He should have seen it coming when he dipped his wick in the company inkwell.

Intelligent yes, real down home smart... no.
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

User avatar
Apollonaris Zeus
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Sep 14, 2003 11:17 am

Post by Apollonaris Zeus » Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:33 am

Very Important!!!!!

Read this- http://www.sptimes.com/2004/06/09/Tampa ... flig.shtml


Michael Moore's movie may be right on track!


A II Z

Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Post by Simply Joel » Tue Jun 22, 2004 11:49 am

Apollonaris Zeus wrote:Very Important!!!!!
Read this- http://www.sptimes.com/2004/06/09/Tampa ... flig.shtml
Michael Moore's movie may be right on track!


A II Z
key operative word in the sentence above is "may"

this does not indicate he is, it only suggests he might be...
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Tue Jun 22, 2004 5:47 pm

now only if Florida can find more ways to improve their voting machines and voter purge methods.......
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Tue Jun 22, 2004 8:12 pm

Now you know things are getting pretty bad when MSNBC starts taking thier cues from Jon Stewart and the daily show. :lol:
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

User avatar
Badger
Posts: 3322
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 2:43 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by Badger » Tue Jun 22, 2004 8:18 pm

good thing Michael More's film arrives this Friday!
Careful what you ask for. You might wanna take a few grains of salt (or a shaker) before the bleating starts.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/
Desert dogs drink deep.

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Tue Jun 22, 2004 8:32 pm

Badger wrote:
good thing Michael More's film arrives this Friday!
Careful what you ask for. You might wanna take a few grains of salt (or a shaker) before the bleating starts.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2102723/

So, just curious, what are your or anyones opinions about what the author says about these following points:

1) The Bin Laden family (if not exactly Osama himself) had a close if convoluted business relationship with the Bush family, through the Carlyle Group.

2) Saudi capital in general is a very large element of foreign investment in the United States.

3) The Unocal company in Texas had been willing to discuss a gas pipeline across Afghanistan with the Taliban, as had other vested interests.

4) The Bush administration sent far too few ground troops to Afghanistan and thus allowed far too many Taliban and al-Qaida members to escape.

5) The Afghan government, in supporting the coalition in Iraq, was purely risible in that its non-army was purely American.

6) The American lives lost in Afghanistan have been wasted. (This I divine from the fact that this supposedly "antiwar" film is dedicated ruefully to all those killed there, as well as in Iraq.)
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Tue Jun 22, 2004 9:39 pm

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York concert promoter has mounted an online campaign to "draft" Bruce Springsteen to headline a rock 'n roll show to upstage the Republican National Convention on the night it nominates President Bush (news - web sites) to run for another term.





The "Concert for Change," would be held Sept. 1 at Giants Stadium, across the Hudson River from the Republicans' meeting at Madison Square Garden, said promoter and Democratic activist Andrew Rasiej, who has reserved the date at Springsteen's New Jersey home venue that he routinely sells out when he tours.

"This is a simple idea that captures the imagination of Americans opposed to George Bush," Rasiej told Reuters.

An online petition at www.draftbruce.com has been signed by about 50,000 people in 10 days since it was launched, Rasiej said, adding he had also reached out to acts such as REM, The Dave Matthews Band, Bob Dylan and Carlos Santana.

"When it gets to half a million or so I would formally try to deliver the petition to Bruce's people directly," he said.

"I've spoken to the manager of REM, to Bon Jovi's people and the rest of the names I've mentioned and they all said, 'if you build it, we will be there."'

Rasiej said he envisions drawing a big TV audience, but only if he can get a star of the magnitude of Springsteen to get on board and encourage other big acts to take part.

Springsteen's publicist was not available for comment.

Republicans and Democrats both asked to use his 1984 hit "Born in the U.S.A." -- a song about how unwelcoming America was to returning Vietnam veterans but often mistaken for a patriotic anthem -- for use in political campaigns. Springsteen declined the requests.

The New Jersey rocker has typically stayed out of politics, but in May posted the text of an anti-war speech by former Vice President Al Gore (news - web sites) on his official Web site, calling it "one of the most important speeches I've heard in a long time."

Rasiej, founder of popular New York rock club Irving Plaza, said a "VoteAid" show could win a large TV audience, raise money to support voter registration and deliver a message that could affect the November presidential election.




Go Fuckin Bruce Go !!!!!
This is the best idea I've seen to date put foward for the ideal response to the dim-wit republican slime fest in New York!!!!
Support this in any way you can and you will go to Heaven on earth
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Wed Jun 23, 2004 5:34 am

AP Sues Pentagon for Bush's Nat'l Guard Files
Tuesday, June 22, 2004

WASHINGTON — The Associated Press sued the Pentagon and the Air Force on Tuesday, seeking access to all records of George W. Bush's military service during the Vietnam War .

Filed in federal court in New York, where The AP is headquartered, the lawsuit seeks access to a copy of Bush's microfilmed personnel file from the Texas State Library and Archives Commission in Austin.

The White House says the government has already released all the records of Bush's military service.

Controversy surrounds Bush's time in the Texas Air National Guard because it is unclear from the record what duties he performed for the military when he was working on the political campaign of a U.S. Senate candidate in Alabama.

There are questions as to whether the file provided to the news media earlier this year is complete, says the lawsuit, adding that these questions could possibly be answered by reviewing a copy of the microfilm of Bush's personnel file in the Texas archives.

The Air National Guard of the United States, a federal entity, has control of the microfilm, which should be disclosed in its entirety under the Freedom of Information Act, the lawsuit says.
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Wed Jun 23, 2004 5:58 am

The Clinton BBC "PANORAMA" interview.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/p ... 817495.stm
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Wed Jun 23, 2004 7:44 am

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
robbidobbs
Posts: 2825
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 1:07 pm
Burning Since: 1999
Camp Name: Pottie Central
Location: LOS of the Pottie doors

Al Gore speech

Post by robbidobbs » Wed Jun 23, 2004 11:39 am

Having just finished reading Al Gore's speech (thanks for posting the link btw), a single word bubbled to consciousness. An old word, that I studied in college, a word that today has been corrupted into unrecognizability by everyone but those who understand it's original definition. It is right up there with UFO's, Hal Lindsey and Conspiracy Theory when the light of this powerful word is used to describe their actions.

It is a word that answers all the "unanswered" questions on why the Bush administration, and those that put him into power. It answers intent. It explains why their actions seem confusing for those outside of it's power, it explains the "big picture" on why the twin towers were destroyed, and why we are currently in a war on terrorism that seems counter-productive. It encompasses the Afghanistan opium trade and the price of oil. It is the direct result of corporate greed mixed with religious zeal.

That word is fascism. Benito Mussolini bundled the concepts into a political agenda, but others have taken this bundle and are now running with it. If you wonder why we are in a futile war, this is the answer. If you ask why Americans are exposed to attrocities at the hands of Americans, this is the answer. If you want to know why it is in their best interest to create hatred of Americans, to foment distrust, and to create paranoia, there is one word to look at very closely.

When you see "incompetent", think "hidden agenda". When you see "bungling", think "calculated." The men who put Bush up to all this horror are not stupid. They have no names. Anyone with a name can be thrown out. The nameless will remain. And when moral individuals inside the military show their humanity, their anger and their resistance to the agenda, they are thrown out in favor for those without moral compunction. Welcome in the Corporate Army.

Trust no one. WWIV is upon us, and it is a holy war. It began Sept 11, 2001, but it started long before that. It either ends in January 2005 or it will continue. In either case, best hold onto yer private parts, cause its gonna be a rough ride this autumn.

Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Post by Simply Joel » Wed Jun 23, 2004 11:43 am

June 23, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
The Great Cash Cow
By WILLIAM SAFIRE

This was the biggest cash cow in the history of the world," says one of the insiders familiar with the $10 billion U.N. oil-for-food scandal. "Everybody — traders, contractors, banks, inspectors — was milking it. It was supposed to buy food with the money from oil that the U.N. allowed Saddam to sell, but less than half went for that. Perfume, limos, a shipment of 1,500 Ping-Pong tables, for God's sake."

Another whistle-blower, often on the "graveyard shift" of round-the-clock operations at the U.N.'s New York Office of the Iraq Program, explains the workings of the historic rip-off:

Well-connected international traders — called "the usual suspects" by low-level U.N. staff, who knew they often fronted for sellers of luxury products — would make their deals, including kickbacks, in Baghdad. Letters of credit, as many as 150 a day, would be issued in New York by the U.N.'s favorite bank, BNP Paribas.

But before the sellers, called "beneficiaries," could be paid (at Saddam's request, in euros, harder to trace than dollars) the bank required a C.O.A., "Confirmation of Arrival," from the U.N.'s contracted inspector, Cotecna of Switzerland.

"The key was Cotecna," says my graveyard source. "Ships were lined up at the port of Umm Qasr, stacks of containers already onshore waiting for inspection. You won't believe the grease being paid. The usual suspects got preferential treatment when the U.N. bosses in New York called the BNP bank to get Cotecna to issue a C.O.A. to release the money."

Last week, Secretary General Kofi Annan claimed that my reporting of what he told me at a luncheon was "a private conversation" (no such ground rule was set) and that "some are jumping to conclusions without facts, without evidence. It is a bit like a lynching, actually."

However, my call for a Congressional subpoena to overcome his attempt to limit investigation to his internal Volcker committee has flushed out a fact not hitherto disclosed. Annan's press aide complained to The Times that a subpoena had already been served secretly on BNP Paribas (the initials once stood for Banque Nationale de Paris) by the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

Although the U.N. had warned its bank, as well as Cotecna, the oil monitor Saybolt and all its other oil-for-food contractors, not to cooperate with anybody but Paul Volcker — and had blown off the House International Relations Committee's requests — Annan's advisers knew it would be unseemly and foolhardy to insist that its bank fight the Senate in court.

With his subpoena and investigation thus publicly revealed by the U.N., Chairman Norm Coleman of Minnesota, a Brooklyn-born Republican, felt free to take my call. "This is a major priority for us," he says. "There's a lot of stuff to cover, a big universe of documents, and we're being aggressive about it. Yes, Cotecna, Saybolt, all of them."

He sent out four "chairman's letters," countersigned by the ranking Democrat, Carl Levin, in early June. One was to the U.S. State Department for the minutes of the "661 committee" meetings at the U.N., which reviewed oil-for-food contracts (though not yet for copies of the contracts themselves). Another to the Government Accounting Office, which had first estimated the skimming at $10 billion. Another to Paul Bremer in Baghdad for copies of documents being turned over to the interim government — and the Senate still awaits a response; apparently the White House doesn't want to offend the U.N. Finally, a friendly letter to Annan about the subpoena that would require his bank to open its letter-of-credit files.

Now let's review the investigative bidding. The Senate seems serious; though Coleman is a freshman, the subcommittee staff is experienced and nonpartisan. The House is doing what it can. The U.N. allocated $4 million to Volcker, but he hasn't yet submitted a budget or announced a staff. The New York Fed defers to its old boss, and the New York State Banking Department is overdrawn.

But since this involves possible fraud, bribery and larceny on a grand scale, where is law enforcement? Interesting: the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, David Kelley, served subpoenas last week on Exxon Mobil, ChevronTexaco and Valero about Iraqi oil purchases. That deals with the income side of the scandal, the money for Iraq (less kickbacks) supposedly to buy food.

I suspect Kelley was moved to empanel a grand jury by probable competition from the Manhattan district attorney, Robert Morganthau, on the scandal's payoff side. These two offices compete, and Morganthau's office has expertise on global banking.

Without imputing wrongdoing to any individual, I suggest investigators supplement their document search by talking to people who should be in the know. At the U.N., these include Benon Sevan's deputy, Teklay Afeworki, and at the bank, Pierre Veyres and Eva Millas-Russo.

But defenders of U.N. malfeasance can take heart. In a counterattack, our global servants hired an accountant to warn of "fraudulent acts" by the U.S. after it took over the U.N.'s mismanaged Iraqi oil account. Now, that will get media coverage.

Copyright 2004 The New York Times Company |
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

User avatar
stuart
Posts: 3325
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Post by stuart » Wed Jun 23, 2004 1:19 pm

points 1-3 are completely uncontroversial

User avatar
stuart
Posts: 3325
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Post by stuart » Wed Jun 23, 2004 1:22 pm

i may need a grain, or shaker of salt, but I am sure Chris Hitchens is begging for another scotch. I don't believe there has been a sober sighting of him since the mid nineties. No Joke.

User avatar
stuart
Posts: 3325
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Post by stuart » Wed Jun 23, 2004 1:28 pm


User avatar
G.W.B.
Posts: 179
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 12:13 am

Post by G.W.B. » Wed Jun 23, 2004 1:30 pm

Great link. thanks.
Grand Whopping Bastard.

Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Post by Simply Joel » Wed Jun 23, 2004 3:00 pm

as great as the link is supposed to be.... it still requires registration to yet another URL... sheesh.

i found reading right up to the requirement for registration akin to news teasers on TV like...

"the World has ended, tune in at 11 for the detailed story"

sheesh.
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

User avatar
stuart
Posts: 3325
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 10:45 am
Location: East of Lincoln

Post by stuart » Wed Jun 23, 2004 4:26 pm

well, I could always cut and paste.

to sum up, while GWB does suck, he aint no fascist.

User avatar
cowboyangel
Posts: 6987
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 10:32 pm

Post by cowboyangel » Wed Jun 23, 2004 5:29 pm

stuart wrote:i may need a grain, or shaker of salt, but I am sure Chris Hitchens is begging for another scotch. I don't believe there has been a sober sighting of him since the mid nineties. No Joke.
Hitchens used to write for the Nation until he tired of the anti-war stance...I think he's actually a very spiritual guy ( I met him once on a job for the Nation) Too bad about his pro-war position and at that being conducted by a bunch of fools
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believe is false."- William Casey, CIA Director 1981

User avatar
samtzu
Posts: 3403
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 5:56 pm
Location: Portland,OR;Columbia,CA;Emigrant Wilderness
Contact:

Post by samtzu » Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:20 pm

One man's liberalism is another man's fascism.

The 'reality' of the world today demands (DEMANDS!) a fascist approach to government. The very definition of govenment implies fascism in that it speaks of control of human behavior through force. Too bad.

I've read too much Lao Tzu, Mark Twain, and 'others' to accept this as 'natural'. But, well, here we are... so, who is more fascist? The Dems or the Republicans... different degrees, same fascist tendencies.

Sigh... See ya' on the Playa... :wink:
The revolutionary does not grow up because he cannot grow, while the creative individual cannot grow up because he keeps growing ~~ Eric Hoffer

User avatar
robbidobbs
Posts: 2825
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2003 1:07 pm
Burning Since: 1999
Camp Name: Pottie Central
Location: LOS of the Pottie doors

Fascism defined

Post by robbidobbs » Thu Jun 24, 2004 7:51 am

I'd say that the Republicans have proven the answer to that question by their actions.

Fascism is also called Corporatism. It is the wedding between the State and the Corporation.

Here's Benito's definition of fascism. This is the article that I read in college, and the definition that I was referring to.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/muss ... scism.html
Here are some exerpts:

"War alone brings up to its highest tension all human energy and puts the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have courage to meet it."

Fascism denies that the majority, by the simple fact that it is a majority, can direct human society; it denies that numbers alone can govern by means of a periodical consultation, and it affirms the immutable, beneficial, and fruitful inequality of mankind, which can never be permanently leveled through the mere operation of a mechanical process such as universal suffrage....

Fascism denies, in democracy, the absur[d] conventional untruth of political equality dressed out in the garb of collective irresponsibility, and the myth of "happiness" and indefinite progress

The foundation of Fascism is the conception of the State, its character, its duty, and its aim. Fascism conceives of the State as an absolute, in comparison with which all individuals or groups are relative, only to be conceived of in their relation to the State.

The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone

Peoples which are rising, or rising again after a period of decadence, are always imperialist; and renunciation is a sign of decay and of death. "

Simply Joel
Posts: 3483
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2004 9:08 am
Location: Land of Lincoln
Contact:

Post by Simply Joel » Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:10 am

<yawn>
Democrats... snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, daily!


slap my salmon, baby

User avatar
DVD Burner
Posts: 10358
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:09 am
Burning Since: 1986
Camp Name: White Trash Camp
Contact:

Post by DVD Burner » Thu Jun 24, 2004 9:21 am

So does anyone still think your vote really counts and will in november?




Supreme Court sends Cheney energy panel case back to lower court



The Associated Press

June 24, 2004, 11:23 AM EDT


The Bush administration won't have to reveal secret details of Vice President Dick Cheney's energy task force before the election, after the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a lower court should spend more time sorting out the White House's privacy claim.

In a 7-2 decision, justices said the lower court should consider whether a federal open government law could be used to get task force documents. Even if that court rules against the administration, appeals would tie up the case well past November.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, writing for the majority, said the federal district court judge who ordered records opened to the public had issued too broad a release of documents.

"Special considerations applicable to the president and the vice president suggest that the courts should be sensitive to requests by the government" in such special appeals, he wrote.

The issues in the case have been overshadowed by conflict-of-interest questions about Justice Antonin Scalia, who sided with the majority.

Scalia defiantly refused to recuse himself from the case, rejecting arguments by critics who said his impartiality was brought into question because of a hunting vacation that he took with Cheney while the court was considering the vice president's appeal.

He and Justice Clarence Thomas wrote separately Thursday to say U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan "clearly exceeded" his authority in ordering the administration to release records.

Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David H. Souter said in a dissent that Sullivan should be allowed to consider what records should be released. They said it was not enough for the Bush administration to request blanket protection from having to make records public.

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said that while the White House hasn't had a chance to review the decision, it is pleased. "We believe the president should be able to receive candid and unvarnished advice from his staff and advisers. It's an important principle," he said.

At issue was a 1972 open government law, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires government panels to conduct their business in public, unless all members are government officials.

Until the government produces some records, it won't be clear who drafted the government's policies, lawyers for the groups that sued to get the records argued.

Shortly after taking office, President Bush put Cheney, a former energy industry executive, in charge of the task force which, after a series of private meetings in 2001, produced recommendations generally friendly to industry.

The Sierra Club, a liberal environmental club, and Judicial Watch, a conservative legal group, sued to get the records. They argued the public has a right to information about committees like Cheney's. The organizations contended that environmentalists were shut out of the meetings, while executives like former Enron Corp. Chairman Kenneth Lay were key task force players.

The suing groups allege the industry representatives in effect functioned as members of the government panel, which included Cabinet secretaries and lower-level administration employees.

The Bush administration argued that privacy is important to ensure members of such panels can speak candidly. It contended that the open records law did not apply to the task force.

The case had become a potentially embarrassing election-year problem for the administration. Thursday's decision buys the administration more time. If it loses in the appeals court, the administration can return to the Supreme Court in another extended appeal before having to release information.

The Sierra Club had asked Scalia to stay out of the case, because the justice flew with Cheney to hunt in Louisiana in January, weeks after the high court agreed to hear the administration's appeal. Many Democrats and dozens of newspapers also called for his recusal.

Scalia, a Reagan administration appointee and close friend of the vice president, had said the duck hunting trip was acceptable socializing that wouldn't cloud his judgment. "If it is reasonable to think that a Supreme Court justice can be bought so cheap, the nation is in deeper trouble than I had imagined," he wrote in an unusual 21-page memo announcing his decision to stay on the case.

The Supreme Court was the latest stop in a nearly three-year fight over access to records of the task force that prepared a national energy strategy in 2001. Most of the recommendations stalled in Congress.

A separate lawsuit seeks thousands of documents under a separate law, the Freedom of Information Act. A judge ruled this spring that those documents should be released.

The case is Cheney v. U.S. District Court, 03-475.
https://www.facebook.com/NeXTCODER

Locked

Return to “Open Discussion”