Blog For Free!
Archives
Home
2005 January
2004 December
2004 November
2004 October
2004 September
2004 August
2004 July
2004 June
2004 May
2004 April
2004 March
2004 February
2004 January
2003 December
2003 November
2003 October
2003 September
2003 August
2003 July
My Links
Contact Congress
Casualties in Iraq
National Debt Clock
tBlog
My Profile
Send tMail
My tFriends
My Images
Sponsored
Blog
|
| Neo-Con Arm-Chair Chicken-Hawks Lust For Wars in Syria, Iran & N Korea |
| 12.31.03 (7:10 am) [edit] |
[b]The neo-con "crazies" in the corrupt Bush regime are arm-chair [i]chicken-hawks [/i][/b]([i]none of whom served this nation, when it was their turn to go to war ... oh, no ... they had "other priorities" & were cowards who were AWOL when better men died[/i]) ... Now, these neo-fascist goons & thugs lust for wars in Syria, Iran & N, Korea.
Is this what "We the People" want? Surely not! Let us declare our independence from the Mad King George and his corporate rapists who are illegally & immorally amassing fabulous power & riches, from their insane war-profiteering!
Consider "[i][b]Hawks tell Bush how to win war on terror [/b][/i]" on http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne...;$sessionid$U0WNAGBDSQVJJ QFIQMFCFFWAVCBQYIV0?xml=/ news/2003/12/31/wcons31.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/12/ 31/ixnewstop.html :
President George W Bush was sent a public manifesto yesterday by Washington's hawks, demanding regime change in Syria and Iran and a Cuba-style military blockade of North Korea backed by planning for a pre-emptive strike on its nuclear sites.
The manifesto, presented as a "manual for victory" in the war on terror, also calls for Saudi Arabia and France to be treated not as allies but as rivals and possibly enemies.
The manifesto is contained in a new book by Richard Perle, a Pentagon adviser and "intellectual guru" of the hardline neo-conservative movement, and David Frum, a former Bush speechwriter. They give warning of a faltering of the "will to win" in Washington.
In the battle for the president's ear, the manifesto represents an attempt by hawks to break out of the post-Iraq doldrums and strike back at what they see as a campaign of hostile leaking by their foes in such centres of caution as the State Department or in the military top brass.
Their publication, An End to Evil: How to Win the War on Terror, coincided with the latest broadside from the hawks' enemy number one, Colin Powell, the secretary of state.
Though on leave recovering from a prostate cancer operation, Mr Powell summoned reporters to his bedside to hail "encouraging" signs of a "new attitude" in Iran and call for the United States to keep open the prospect of dialogue with the Teheran authorities.
Such talk is anathema to hawks like Mr Perle and Mr Frum who urge Washington to shun the mullahs and work for their overthrow in concert with Iranian dissidents.
It may be assumed that their instincts at least are shared by hawks inside the government, whose twin power bases are the Pentagon's civilian leadership and the office of the vice-president, Dick Cheney.
Such officials prevailed over invading Afghanistan and Iraq, but have been seen as on the back foot since the autumn as their post-war visions of building a secular, free-market Iraq were scaled back in favour of compromise and a swift handover of power next June.
The book demands that any talks with North Korea require the complete and immediate abandonment of its nuclear programme.
As North Korea will probably refuse such terms, the book urges a Cuba-style military blockade and overt preparations for war, including the rapid pullback of US forces from the inter-Korean border so that they move out of range of North Korean artillery.
Such steps, with luck, will prompt China to oust its nominal ally, Kim Jong-il, and install a saner regime in North Korea, the authors write.
The authoritarian rule of Syria's leader, Bashar Assad, should also be ended, encouraged by shutting oil supplies from Iraq, seizing arms he buys from Iran, and raids into Syria to hunt terrorists.
The authors urge Mr Bush to "tell the truth about Saudi Arabia". Wealthy Saudis, some of them royal princes, fund al-Qa'eda, they write.
The Saudi government backs "terror-tainted Islamic organisations" as part of a larger campaign to "spread its extremist version of Islam throughout the Muslim world and into Europe and North America".
The book calls for tough action against France and its dreams of offsetting US power. "We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington," it states. Britain's independence from Europe should be preserved, perhaps with open access for British arms to American defence markets.
|
|
|
| |
| Political winners and losers of 2003 |
| 12.30.03 (7:34 am) [edit] |
[b]As "We the People" see through the end of 2003, it is valuable to reflect upon the road travelled over this last year and to assess the direction we need to set for the future ... [/b]As part of this reflection, it is both useful and fun to review the assessments of [i]political winners & losers[/i], and to ask [i]why[/i]!?!?
In "[i][b]Political winners and losers of 2003[/b][/i]" on http://csmonitor.com/2003/123... :
[b]WASHINGTON [/b]– As the last days of 2003 tick away, this city is in slow motion. Orange alerts aside, Washington loves a good holiday break, particularly in the year before a presidential race. There is time to think about the campaign ahead and time to sort through the winners and losers of the past 365 days.
The list is long, but there are a few items to ponder.
[b]1. Who had a worse year, [i]Sen. John Kerry [/i]or the Detroit Tigers?[/b] It's tempting to say the Tigers, who lost 119 games, coming up one short of Major League Baseball's record 120. But not much was expected of the Tigers, who've been awful for years.
The Kerry campaign's failings, however, were more startling. In one year the Massachusetts senator has watched his standing in one New Hampshire poll go from a 12-point lead over his nearest challenger to a 25-point deficit. Here in Washington, where Senator Kerry was once considered a party establishment favorite, he has fallen in the polls to 4 percent behind even, yes, the Rev. Al Sharpton.
The Tigers have added a second baseman and a center fielder for their 2004 campaign. It really doesn't matter whom Kerry adds at this point; his campaign won't see spring training.
[b]2. Can anyone stop [i]Howard Dean [/i]from getting the Democratic nomination? [/b]At this point only Howard Dean, but he seems willing to give it the old college try. The candidate's penchant for talking first and thinking later has his list of misstatements growing by the day. It's not clear yet whether this is the growing pains of a campaign going from insurgent outsider to anointed front-runner or something more serious.
If Kerry's 2003 was bad, Governor Dean's was a triumph. While he has faced criticism for being on the far left of the Democratic party, he has simply run a classic primary campaign. He has gone left to win more committed voters. Expect a swing back to the middle soon when his moderate governing of Vermont will become the focus. He has ridden a wave of enthusiasm so well that he has all but wiped out his opponents before a vote has been cast. Oh yeah, and he has done it all while raising ridiculous amounts of money.
If Dean can actually rein in his temper and cut down on his gaffes (granted, two big ifs), his no-nonsense approach to campaigning could make him what the White House should fear most, a reprise of John McCain's 2000 candidacy. You could have said Dean had the best year in politics of anyone, were it not for the folks in the White House.
[b]3. How does the [i]president[/i] do it?[/b] Yes, the past month or so has been good for President Bush, who has seen the economy slowly gain momentum and watched as Saddam Hussein was checked for head lice by US troops. A recent Gallup survey found 63 percent of Americans approved of the job he was doing - that is an astounding number for the president, considering the list of bad news and the unfinished business on his desk.
The deficit sits at an all-time high, and conservatives criticize the president for too much spending. The Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were never found. Afghanistan is a mess. The unemployment rate sits stubbornly at roughly 6 percent. And there are connections between the vice president and a company that is being given billions in government contracts - connections that would have brought calls for an independent counsel during the Clinton years.
And despite all that, George W. Bush is looking like a better and better bet for reelection going into 2004. So how does he do it? It's part media management and part public mood, but no one knows for sure exactly. And going into 2004, that is the president's greatest strength. As a baseball man, he knows the secret to most great pitches is camouflage. You can't hit what you can't see.
|
|
|
| |
| World Leader's Report Cards for 2003 ... |
| 12.30.03 (7:14 am) [edit] |
[b]The Bush/Cheney Inc. [i] junta [/i]certainly made a lasting impact upon the world, this last year ... but not for the better. "We the People" will be judged on the basis of having supported a neo-con, neo-fascist leader [/b]who has ruthlessly[i] waged immoral & illegal warfare [/i]to enrich [i]corporate war-profiteers [/i]... and, has recklessly[i] damaged our economy[/i], resulting in historical record-level deficits, skyrocketing poverty & homelessness, lost jobs, and a growing gap between the very, very rich & the rest of us who will [i]bear the brunt of inflation and a crumbling infrastructure[/i]. Moreover, our health care crisis is being ignored, in addition to improving education and providing a better world for our children and future generations ...
Consider "[i][b]LEADER'S REPORT CARDS FOR 2003[/b][/i]" by Eric S. Margolis, on http://www.bigeye.com/foreign... :
[b]George W. Bush [/b]— Managed by brilliant political handlers, wins big time on the domestic front. Tax cuts, subsidized drugs, a rebounding economy and the capture of Saddam Hussein (and maybe Osama bin Laden just before 04 elections), will likely win Bush re-election. But the worst foreign policy maker in memory.
Middle America loves Texas Ranger Bush, who claims to take his orders from god. But Bush's divinely inspired mission has run up a $400 billion plus deficit and is gravely undermining constitutional rights and liberties at home. Two unresolved wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost $166 billion, over 3,000 US casualties, and growing anti-US feeling around the globe. Terrorism continues unabated.
Much of the rest of the world abhors Bush's extremist, Christian fundamentalist, neo-conservative agenda. Abroad, his faux `war on terrorism' is seen as a crudely disguised imperial power grab. [b]GRADE: [i]D[/i][/b]
[b]Osama bin Laden [/b]— The man who made Bush's presidency. Still in the lam, still encouraging attacks on the US and its allies. A fanatic's fanatic, who commands undue respect across the Muslim World. The US military-industrial-petro leum complex owes this Islamic wildman a great debt: he alone justified an imperial agenda and the Pentagon's bloated defense budget that accounts for 33% of total world military spending. Bin Laden has said he will die this coming year in a spectacular `martyrdom operation.' [b]GRADE: [i]F[/i][/b]
[b]Dick Cheney [/b]— Bush talks to god; Cheney talks to the Pentagon. He runs Washington's militarized foreign policy through a network of neo-conservatives. Cheney's repeated warnings about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and links to al-Qaida sound dangerously out of touch with reality. His close links to the rapacious Halliburton company may be a major campaign liability in 04. So may a future scandal over the Carlyle Corp, the shadowy epicenter of Washington's military-industrial-petro leum complex. [b]GRADE: [i]F[/i][/b]
[b]Tony Blair [/b]— Unrelentingly sanctimonious and preachy, Blair's servile behavior towards the White House in 2003 made many Britons, who detest their government's war policies, wonder if Merry Olde England had not quietly become a colony of the United States. Blair's hopes of joining in the economic rapine of Iraq's oil wealth have, so far, been unfulfilled. [b]GRADE: [i]C[/i]-[/b]
[b]Saddam Hussein [/b]— The Father of All Disasters. Failed miserably to head off impending US attack, just like in 1991. Conducted a pathetic defense. Probably captured by Kurds, drugged, then deeply humiliated by his US captors. A disgrace to the Arabs, who already have disgraces to spare. He should be sent for trial in the Hague. [b]GRADE: [i]F[/i] [/b]
[b]Pope John Paul II [/b]— This noble, heroic man soldiers on in spite of his crumbling body. Acting as the world's conscience, the Holy Father has championed the rights of the downtrodden, the voiceless, the oppressed, opposing current militarism and capitalist excesses with the same force with which he battled the evils of communism and socialism. Who, one wonders, will replace this truly great man? [b]GRADE: [i]A[/i]+[/b]
[b]Jacques Chirac [/b]— The quintessence of a grandiloquent, slippery, scandal-plagued French politician, Chirac has nonetheless gained genuine stature as the voice of `old' (that is, not for sale) Europe. The contrast between Chirac's good sense and reasoned policies and George Bush's crusading religious zeal could not be sharper. France remains the land of reason — French drivers excepted. [b]GRADE:[i] B[/i]+[/b]
[b]Ariel Sharon [/b]— Bush's role model, adored by many Israelis. A mighty smiter of Israel's foes. But Bulldozer Sharon is leading his nation into a wilderness of oppression and apartheid, unless the Greater Israel scheme is ended for good and a viable Palestinian state created. Time for Israel's moderates to be heard at home and in North America. Maybe Sharon will become an Israeli DeGaulle by making peace with the Arabs next year. Whatever, Sharon and his nemesis, PLO leader Yasser Arafat, should retire by the end of 04 and make way for younger, more flexible men who are sick of communal conflict. [b]GRADE: [i]C[/i]-[/b]
[b]Vladimir Putin [/b]— Barely noticed by the outside world, this hard man has gathered all the reins of power in Mother Russia and put his former KGB colleagues in charge of just about everything important. The unsmiling, incorruptible Putin is laying the foundation for the re-emergence of Russia as a great world power and the reincarnation of the old Soviet Union. Tsar Vlad I bears much watching. [b]GRADE: [i]A[/i] (with an [i]F[/i] for democracy) [/b]
[b]Hu Jintao [/b]— China's new leader (if you don't count old Jiang Zemin, who is supposedly retired, but still runs things). Hu has not yet made any impression on the world, or done very much visible, for that matter. But by so far avoiding social turmoil in China, and by refusing to give in to US demands to devalue China's fixed rate currency, Hu has prevented a sharp currency devaluation that would have caused massive bank failures and the implosion of China's soaring but still fragile economy - a disaster that would shake the world's economy. [b]GRADE: [i]C[/i]+[/b]
[b][u]Special Mention[/u]:[/b]
[b]Jean Chretien [/b]— He didn't change the world, but when he retired this month, this down-to-earth leader left Canada at peace, wealthy, socially tranquil, humane, and respected around the world. It was easy to poke fun at Chretien, but few leaders can equal this accomplishment. We salute him. [b]GRADE:[i] B[/i][/b]
|
|
|
| |
| Jobless Count Misses Millions ... |
| 12.29.03 (1:04 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" are facing a dire economic scenario confronting our nation, in the near future ... with the ruthless Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's [/i]record-level deficits ([i]to enrich corporations & the rich plutocracy ... and, no investment in our people or our infrastructure[/i]) that will create severe financial hardships for average and working Americans, and unconscionable misery for many elderly and poor people.[/b]
During the 1990s, the US economy created over 22 million jobs ([i]under Clinton who inherited a slow economy with stagnant job creation & unemployment at 7.5% officially, and turned the Reagan/Bush-41 recession around to create a budget surplus-- which Dubya has recklessly squandered-- and Clinton reduced unemployment to around 4.2% officially[/i])-- During Bush's corrupt [i]term-in-office[/i], in the last 3 years, over 3 million jobs were lost and unemployment is officially at 5.9%-- but studies show it is much, much worse ... anywhere from 9.7% to 15% in the U.S.A. ( http://www.cariboo.bc.ca/dsd/... ).
[i]Consider the following article [/i]...
In "[i][b]Jobless Count Skips Millions: The Rate Hits 9.7% When the Underemployed and Those Who Have Quit Looking are Added[/b][/i]" on http://www.commondreams.org/h... :
SAN FRANCISCO — Lisa Gluskin has had a tough three years. She works almost as hard as she did during the dot-com boom, for about 20% of the income.
When Gluskin's writing and editing business cratered in 2001, she slashed her rates, began studying for a graduate degree and started teaching part time at a Lake Tahoe community college for a meager wage.
It's been a fragmented, hand-to-mouth life, one that she sees mirrored by friends and colleagues who are waiting tables or delivering packages. In the late '90s, the 35-year-old Gluskin says, "we had careers. We had trajectories. Now we have complicated lives. We're not unemployed, but we're underemployed."
The nation's official jobless rate is 5.9%, a relatively benign level by historical standards. But economists say that figure paints only a partial — and artificially rosy — picture of the labor market.
To begin with, there are the 8.7 million unemployed, defined as those without a job who are actively looking for work. But lurking behind that group are 4.9 million part-time workers such as Gluskin who say they would rather be working full time — the highest number in a decade.
There are also the 1.5 million people who want a job but didn't look for one in the last month. Nearly a third of this group say they stopped the search because they were too depressed about the prospect of finding anything. Officially termed "discouraged," their number has surged 20% in a year.
Add these three groups together and the jobless total for the U.S. hits 9.7%, up from 9.4% a year ago.
No wonder the Democratic presidential candidates have seized on jobs as a potentially powerful weapon.
Howard Dean criticized President Bush for "the worst job creation record in over 60 years." Richard Gephardt said that "I have three goals for my presidency: jobs, jobs, jobs." John Kerry said "the first thing" he'd do as president would be to fight his "heart out" to bring back the jobs that have disappeared in recent years.
Bush, meanwhile, is quick to seize credit where he can. When the unemployment rate for November fell one-tenth of a point, he went out immediately to give a speech at a Home Depot in Maryland.
"More workers are going to work, over 380,000 have joined the workforce in the last couple of months," Bush said. "We've overcome a lot."
A number of economists say it's a mistake to evaluate the job market solely by talking about the official unemployment rate. It's a blunt instrument for assessing a condition that is growing ever more vague.
"There's certainly an arbitrariness to the official rate," says Princeton University economics professor Alan Krueger. "It irks me that it's not put in proper perspective."
On Jan. 9, when the rate for December is announced, both Republicans and Democrats will assuredly again maneuver for advantage — precisely because the number isn't expected to change much.
"At this point, where we don't know which way it's going but it isn't likely to be going far, both sides will try to use it," says Michael Lewis-Beck, a political scientist at the University of Iowa.
In every election since 1960, the party in the White House lost when the unemployment rate deteriorated during the first half of the year. If the rate improved, the party in the White House won.
That's not a coincidence, says Lewis-Beck, who has edited several volumes on how economic conditions determine elections. "People see the president as the chief executive of the economy," he says. "They punish him if things are deteriorating and reward him if things are improving."
By any normal standard, things should have been improving on the employment front long before this point. More than 2 million jobs have been lost in the last three years, a period that encompassed a brief, nasty recession and a recovery that was anemic until recently. Even in the best-case scenario, Bush will end this term with a net job loss. That hasn't happened to a president since Herbert Hoover at the beginning of the Depression.
Many economists are mystified about why a suddenly booming economy is producing so few jobs.
"We're all sitting there and saying, 'When are they going to return?' " says Richard B. Freeman, director of the labor studies program at the National Bureau of Economic Research. "It's looking a little better, but we don't understand why it isn't looking a lot better. Why shouldn't Bush be sitting there saying, 'Man, I'm sitting pretty. This is a great boom'?"
One statistic proving particularly perplexing is the percentage of the adult population that is employed. This number rises during good times, as people are lured into the workforce, and falls during recessions as companies falter.
True to form, the percentage of adult Americans with jobs dropped from a high of 64.8% in April 2000, just as the stock market was cresting, to 62% in September — the lowest level in a decade. If past recessions are any guide, those 5 million people who found themselves jobless should have driven the unemployment rate up to about 8%.
Instead, the rate never went much above 6%.
"More than half of the additional people who would have reported themselves as unemployed in a previous big recessionary period … aren't," a puzzled UC Berkeley economist, Brad DeLong, wrote on his website. "They're reporting themselves as out of the labor force instead."
"Out of the labor force" means you're not working for even one hour a week and don't want to, either. It's the traditional category for students, married women with young children, flush retirees and idle millionaires.
A new way that people seem to be joining this category is by getting themselves declared disabled. This designation makes them eligible for government payments while removing them from the unemployment rolls.
From 1983 to 2000, economists David Autor and Mark Duggan wrote in a recent study, the number of non-elderly adults receiving government disability payments doubled from 3.8 million to 7.7 million.
The scholars present a case that the sharp increase isn't because the workplace suddenly became more dangerous. Instead, it has been prompted by liberalized screening policies, which make it possible to claim disabled status for, say, several small impairments as opposed to one big injury. Government examinations also have been downplayed in favor of the disabled's own medical records and the pain he or she claims to be experiencing.
At the same time, benefits have been sweetened. As a result, millions of individuals who lost jobs now have an attractive — and permanent — alternative to searching for work.
Autor and Duggan concluded that if disability payments weren't so appealing, many more people would be unemployed, boosting the jobless rate two-thirds of a point.
Another way in which people forgo an appearance on the unemployment rolls is if they decide to go into business for themselves. There are 9.6 million people who say they are self-employed full time, a number that rose 118,000 last month. Without the recent increase in self-employed, the jobless number would look much worse.
Many others may be working for themselves part time, temporarily, as a way to get food on the table in the absence of better options.
Take Steve Fahringer, who until recently was working for a Bay Area marketing agency that cut 20% of its employees and trimmed the wages of the remainder by 20%. Fahringer didn't particularly like his job. Because the recession supposedly was history, he thought he could find a new position. The 34-year-old didn't think it would be easy, but he thought it possible. So he quit.
"I left July 1," he says. "I haven't found a new job yet."
It's a common problem. The segment of the labor force that has been jobless for more than 15 weeks has risen nearly 150% since 2000. The current level is the highest since the recession of the early 1990s. Nearly one-quarter of the jobless have been unemployed for longer than six months.
In Fahringer's case, he spent some time aggressively looking for a job, which made him part of the official July unemployment rate of 6.2%. Then he stopped looking, which meant that he was one small reason the rate started going down.
Instead of unemployed, Fahringer was classified as "discouraged." A little more than 8% of the people who want a job in the Bay Area are estimated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics to be discouraged, slightly higher than Los Angeles/Long Beach but lower than the battered technology center of San Jose.
Discouraged workers have never been included in unemployment rates, although they came close the last time a commission met to reform the system, a quarter of a century ago. "It was a very hot issue," remembers Glen Cain, a retired economist who was a commission member. He says the conservatives on the panel, who felt that anyone who really wanted a job should be out there hustling no matter what, prevailed.
Fahringer found an alternative way to earn a bit of money. He did some acrylic paintings, which he sold for a total of $1,000. He calls himself "a hobbyist," which means for a while he moved out of the labor force entirely.
Now he's a temp, assigned by his agency to a nonprofit office. For the first time in six months, he's working 40 hours a week. By the government's accounting, he has once again joined the ranks of the employed. But from the standpoint of his wallet, Fahringer is worse off: He's earning less money, with no paid holidays, no sick leave, no pension plan, no health insurance, no future.
The Economic Policy Institute, a liberal-leaning Washington think tank, says Fahringer's situation is in many ways typical. The industries that were expanding in the late '90s, including computer and professional services, paid well.
Those industries are in retreat. So is manufacturing, a traditional source of high wages. On the rise, meanwhile, are lower-paying service jobs.
During the boom, it was easy to trade up. Now it's just as easy to trade down.
Fahringer's solution: Opt out.
"I'm thinking of going back to school," he says. "I'd take out a loan." That would put him out of the labor force again.
In some eyes, a nation of burger flippers, temps and Wal-Mart clerks isn't the worst scenario for the economy. The worst is that companies continue to eliminate jobs faster than they create them, setting up a game of musical chairs for the labor force.
That prospect alarms Erica Groshen, an economist with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. "If you plot job losses versus gains on a chart, it's shocking," she says.
Losses are running at about the same rate they were in 1997 and 1998, two good years for the economy. But job creation in the first quarter of 2003 — the most recent period available — was only 7.4 million, the lowest since 1993.
"If this goes on too long, you'd have to worry there's something fundamentally wrong," Groshen says. Although the economy has picked up since March, "so far I haven't seen anything that suggests job creation is picking up."
That bodes poorly for Ian Golder. His last full-time job was with a start-up publication that wrote about venture capital.
Two years ago, Golder was laid off. It was the first time since he graduated from UC Berkeley 14 years earlier that he didn't have steady work.
Golder looked for a while, gave up for a while, then landed a contracting gig with no benefits proofreading for a chip maker. When that ran out, he worked 20 hours a month on a financial services newsletter.
His wife, Heather, a recent graduate in English from UC Davis, also was without a job. They thought about selling their house in Sacramento and moving, but prospects didn't look any better anywhere else. To make ends meet, they took in two boarders.
At the beginning of December, things seemed to improve a bit. Golder got a job in the document-control department of a medical devices company. The department, he was told, used to have 20 full-time people. Now it has five, plus four temps.
The job will last two months. After that, who knows?
"Optimists say things will be better then," Golder says. "But a full-time position with benefits seems pretty remote."
[b]Other sources:[/b]
"THE CLINTON-GORE ECONOMIC RECORD: THE LOWEST UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN 30 YEARS" on http://clinton4.nara.gov/text...
"Hunger & Homelessness in the U.S.A. Rise at Double-Digit Rates in 2003" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Beyond Joblessness: The Bushies Economic Program Benefits Corporations, Not Workers" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"The Poverty Quagmire in America" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Corporateers Reap Profits: What About The (Unofficial) 15% Unemployment Rate In The U.S.A.?" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Hunger & Homelessness in the U.S.A. Rise at Double-Digit Rates in 2003 |
| 12.28.03 (7:17 am) [edit] |
[b]Hunger & Homelessness in the U.S.A. Rise at Double-Digit Rates in 2003[/b]
The neo-con Bush regime's neo-fascist economic policies are lauded by corporations, rich plutocrats & their greedy campaign contributors ... But, "We the People" ([i]in the American Middle-Class, Working People, the Elderly and the Poor[/i]) are facing dire & perilous times, in the [i]not too distant future [/i]... The immoral & un-christian re-distribution of our nation's wealth to powerful corporations and the wealthiest among us, by the corrupt & traitorous Bush regime, resulting in massive deficits & impoverished conditions in our nation, ([i]that the rest of us must pay-off[/i]) [i]will result in:--[/i]
* [i]Inflation[/i] as already the costs of fruits & vegetables, meat, energy and other necessities of life are rising sharply;
* [i]Higher interest rates [/i]to pay-back historically unprecedented record-level deficits created by tax cuts for the rich, and illegal & immoral war-mongerings ([i]that bring no benefits to our nation or citizens-- instead, they are designed to enrich the gluttonous corporations & plutocrats[/i]);
* [i]Slashed wages & benefits for working people[/i], as rapacious executive pay packages balloon;
* [i]Skyrocketing poverty and homelessness[/i], in a callous [i]saddam-hussein-style [/i]economy devised by the neo-cons, neo-fascists who do not give a damn about their fellow citizens;
* [i]Lack of health care [/i]for tens of millions of our citizens;
* [i]Lack of other social services[/i], as the neo-cons want to ruthlessly swindle Americans out of basic public services, social security, and other necessities for our nation to remain healthy & democratic;
* [i]Crumbling infrastructure [/i]as schools, fire stations, water systems, roads, etc. deteriorate and we devolve into a 3rd world-style country;
* [i]Higher crime rates[/i], costly to victims and tax-payers, as citizens become more desperate to survive;
* [i]War-mongering [/i]in order to divert the [i]lazy-minded[/i] public from the[i] rape [/i]of our nation, onto the[i] rape [/i]of other nations.
"We the People" must vote for a change in 2004, otherwise we will face these back-breaking costs, heart-breaking barbarities & atrocities, and other miserable perils ... that we have an obligation to fight the neo-cons & neo-fascists to reverse, in order to leave the nation better off today for all citizens, as well as for future generations of Americans.
Consider "[i][b]Hunger and homelessness in US continue to rise in 2003[/b][/i]" on http://www.wsws.org/articles/... :
Hunger and homelessness in the United States continue to rise at double-digit rates in 2003, according to a December 18 report released by the US Conference of Mayors (USCM). In the 25 cities that responded to its survey, requests for emergency food assistance were up 17 percent over last year, while requests for emergency shelter increased by 13 percent on average.
The report cites unemployment and other employment-related problems as the leading cause of hunger, giving the lie to Bush administration claims that an economic recovery is lifting workers out of poverty. While there has been an increase in corporate profits, productivity and stock prices this year, millions of workers remain mired in long-term unemployment and underemployment, with savings and other resources long since exhausted.
Other causes of hunger listed in the report include low-paying jobs, the high cost of housing, medical care costs, substance abuse and mental health problems, reduced public benefits, childcare costs, and transportation expenses.
The leading cause of homelessness is the lack of affordable housing, followed by the lack of needed services for mental health and substance abuse problems, low-paying jobs, unemployment, domestic violence, poverty and prison release.
Continuing the trend of recent years, more families with children as well as the working poor are seeking emergency assistance. Fully 59 percent of those turning to soup kitchens and food pantries this year were children and their parents, while 39 percent of the adults seeking food were employed.
The number of homeless families seeking shelter increased 15 percent in 2003, constituting 40 percent of the overall homeless population. In 15 of the 25 cities surveyed, families may have to break up to be sheltered, while in 12 cities, families usually have to spend the day outside of the shelter they use at night.
Seventeen percent of homeless people work, down slightly from recent years. Five percent are unaccompanied youth, and 10 percent are veterans. Fourteen percent of the shelter population consists of single women, but advocacy groups point out that many of these women are “single” only because they have managed to leave their children with a relative or a close friend.
The average stay in shelters was five months this year. The length of the average stay increased over 2002 in 60 percent of the cities surveyed.
While demand for emergency food and shelter is increasing, the supply in both categories has failed to keep up. Over half of the cities reported having to cut back on the number of bags of food provided, and to limit the number of times people are allowed to receive food. In every city surveyed, families and individuals relied on food assistance both in emergencies and as a steady source of food over long periods. Fourteen percent of those asking for food were denied due to short supply.
The report also documents the lack of sufficient emergency shelter. Thirty percent of applicants for emergency shelter overall, and 33 percent of homeless families were turned away, leaving them to fend for themselves on the streets overnight.
Applications for subsidized housing by low-income families increased this year in 83 percent of the cities surveyed. The average wait for public housing units is 24 months, while the wait for Section 8 vouchers, a federal housing subsidy for approved private rentals, is 27 months. In nearly half the cities, officials had stopped accepting applications for at least one form of subsidized housing because the waiting list is too long.
According to city estimates, low-income households are forced to pay an average of 46 percent of their income on housing, down slightly from 49 percent in last year’s survey. The percentage is much higher in cities with the highest housing costs.
Most US cities with populations of over 1 million are included in the survey, with the prominent exception of the nation’s largest, New York City, and the southwestern metropolises of Houston, Dallas and San Diego. A number of smaller and medium-sized cities also responded to the survey, ranging from Burlington, Vermont, to Salt Lake City, Utah.
In New York City, the situation is no better than elsewhere. The number of people housed in the shelters set a record of 38,638 in one night this month. The number of homeless families stands at 9,211—more than double the number five years ago—and is climbing. This does not count the thousands of people, who, due to the horrible conditions in the shelters, prefer to sleep out in the open, even in winter.
The authors of the USCM report neither draw any conclusions about nor make any recommendations to ameliorate, let alone abolish, the injustice of rising hunger and homelessness in the world’s richest nation. The report does include, however, a number of comments from the surveys. While couched in the carefully worded language of city bureaucrats, these remarks nonetheless point to ways in which today’s starvation conditions are being imposed on the broader sections of workers.
In discussing the poor prospects for next year, a Boston official cites the “termination of unemployment benefits for longer-term unemployed,” referring to the recent refusal of Congress to renew a 13-week federal extension of unemployment benefits that formerly kicked in after the basic 26-week state benefits expired.
A Cleveland respondent points to the reduction every month over the last three years in benefits for welfare recipients, a function of the strict two- and five-year time limits imposed by the Clinton administration’s 1996 welfare “reform.”
A Portland, Oregon, official expects “more people will be in lines and on waiting lists” due to state and local budget cuts. “Mainstream social service systems have faced severe declines in funding and have had to make cuts in services even as the needs have grown,” he writes, continuing: “Local sources of revenue to develop and fund truly affordable housing for the poorest are now almost non-existent. The homeless systems and emergency shelters will feel the pressures of these cuts.”
Among other factors, the San Antonio survey response cites “demolition and non-replacement of public housing, zero tolerance housing policies, and low-wage jobs” as fueling further homelessness. (The zero tolerance policies refer to the practice of evicting whole families from public housing whose children may be charged with minor drug offenses.) The San Antonio response also points to the illegal and usurious lending practices plaguing the poor: “The financial inability to access conventional services forces an already exploited population to utilize payday loans, pawn shops, rent-to-own and other predatory vendors.”
Under these circumstances, the outlook for “those on the margins” in America remains bleak. Some 90 percent of the cities surveyed expect both homelessness and hunger to get only worse in 2004.
[b]Other Sources[/b]:
New York: Homeless man crushed to death by sanitation truck [1 December 2003] on http://www.wsws.org/articles/...
Homeless, poor freeze in US cold wave [5 February 2003] on http://www.wsws.org/articles/...
US mayors’ report chronicles rising hunger and homelessness [27 December 2002] on http://www.wsws.org/articles/...
|
|
|
| |
| Naughty & Nice 2003 ... |
| 12.27.03 (9:09 am) [edit] |
[b]The [i]Center for American Progress [/i]has published a [i]Naughty & Nice [/i]holiday list for [i]2003[/i] ... well worth reading on[/b] http://www.americanprogress.o... . Perhaps "We the People" will wake-up and demand a change for the better in the New Year! Let's make some New Year's Resolutions to oust the corrupt Bush regime and elect better leaders in November 2004!
The following is a [i]sample of a some of the issues [/i]that they highlight from 2003 ...
[i][b]Americans and Troops:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] – [i][b]Operation Hero Miles:[/b][/i] [i]For collecting unused frequent flier miles [/i] http://www.heromiles.org/ from Americans and giving them to soldiers trying to fly home to see their families. So far, "the generosity of thousands of travelers this holiday season means soldiers can get 6,700 free plane tickets allowing them to spend quality time with family and friends without worrying about how much it will cost."
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]Loan Sharks:[/b][/i] For [i]preying on cash-strapped troops[/i] http://www.ajc.com/news/conte... . As more national guard soldiers are called up for prolonged periods of time, they're not making as much money as they were on the outside. Smelling the potential blood in the water, "military bases across the nation are magnets for so-called payday lenders, which make money charging fees as high as $30 every two weeks per $100 borrowed - equal to a 720 percent annual interest rate."
[i][b]Americans and Troops Part II:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] – [i][b]Military Families Speak Out:[/b][/i] For highlighting the problem of the [i]severe body armor shortage [/i] http://www.newtimesbpb.com/is... in Iraq. Because of their work putting this crisis in the spotlight, Congress forced the Administration to make sure more soldiers are better equipped.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] - [i][b]U.S. Rep. George Nethercutt:[/b][/i] For saying the media should be focused on Iraqi reconstruction, [i]which he called [/i] http://seattletimes.nwsource.... "a better and more important story than losing a couple of soldiers every day," despite representing a state where thousands of U.S. troops are stationed.
[i][b]Civil Liberties:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] –[i][b] DoJ Inspector General:[/b][/i] For [i]exposing abuses [/i] http://www.washingtonpost.com... of post-9/11 detainees.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] - [i][b]20 Guards at Brooklyn Detention Center:[/b][/i] For [i]slamming and bouncing detainees against the wall[/i], http://www.washingtonpost.com... twisting their arms and hands in painful ways, stepping on their leg restraint chains and punishing them by keeping them restrained for long periods of time. MDC staff members then attempted to hide video tapes and other evidence documenting the detainees mistreatment.
[i][b]Columnists:--[/b][/ i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] – [i][b]Walter Cronkite:[/b][/i] For [i]coming back [/i] http://www.denverpost.com/Sto...,1413,36~29003~1839593,00 .html on the scene with a new column.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]Ann Coulter:[/b][/i] For still writing her [i]swill[/i] http://www.conservativebookse... .
[i][b]Congress:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] – [i][b]Lawmakers Who Care About Troops:[/b][/i] For forcing the President to fund [i]more body armor[/i] http://www.sunherald.com/mld/... for soldiers.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]Lawmakers Who Care About Food Names:[/b][/i] For spending energy renaming foods like [i]Freedom Fries [/i] http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/So... instead of adequately protecting our troops.
[i][b]Economy:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] – [i][b]The Corporate Recovery:[/b][/i] For growing GDP, up 8.2% in the third quarter, showing that America's [i]macro-economic indicators [/i] http://money.cnn.com/2003/11/... are beginning to move up.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]The Labor Market Lag:[/b][/i] For [i]leaving American workers out of the recovery[/i], http://www.nytimes.com/2003/1... as wages remain down and companies are pocketing the profit from the increased productivity without passing it down.
[i][b]Intelligence:--[/b] [/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] - [i][b]State Dept. Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs: [/b][/i]For writing a [i]comprehensive study [/i] http://foreign.senate.gov/tes... focusing on plans to overcome difficulties in rebuilding Iraq.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]The Pentagon's Office of Special Plans:[/b][/i] For failing to plan for the reconstruction of Iraq, [i]elbowing aside experienced intelligence professionals [/i] http://www.newyorker.com/fact... and ignoring the State Department study on rebuilding Iraq.
[i][b]Kids:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] - [i][b]Kids:[/b][/i] For being so [i]darn cute[/i] http://www.pbase.com/image/24... .
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]House Majority Leader Tom Delay:[/b][/i] For [i]using poor children [/i] http://www.washingtonpost.com... as a pretext to circumvent the law and funnel charitable contributions to wine and dine corporate fat cats for partisan political purposes.
[i][b]National Security:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] - [i][b]The CIA:[/b][/i] For writing the [i]National Intelligence Estimates [/i] http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs... that National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice did not read before putting inaccurate claims into the President's major national security speeches.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]Condoleezza Rice:[/b][/i] For saying the government didn't have warning about 9/11 on the same day the White House admitted it was warned about hijacked planes weeks before 9/11;[i] for not reading memos[/i] http://www.washingtonpost.com... and thus allowing the President to make false nuclear claims in his State of the Union address; for refusing to testify before the independent 9/11.
[i][b]Reconstruction Efforts:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] – [i][b]Morocco:[/b][/i] For offering 2000 [i]landmine-detonating monkeys [/i] http://www.washingtonpost.com... to join the coalition of the willing in Iraq at no charge.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]Halliburton:[/b][/i ] For receiving [i]more than $2 billion [/i] http://www.guardian.co.uk/Ira...,2763,912515,00.html in no-bid government contracts, and then overcharging the government by at least another $61 million. In return, it fed soldiers serving in Iraq [i]unsanitary food[/i] http://www.taipeitimes.com/Ne... .
[i][b]Taxes:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] – [i][b]Gov. Bob Riley (AL): [/b][/i]For trying to avoid crippling fiscal crisis while giving a hand to the working poor by narrowing the state's incredible income inequality and [i]shifting the tax burden [/i] http://www.usatoday.com/news/... http://www.washingtonpost.com... to big corporations.
[u][b]NAUGHTY[/b][/u] – [i][b]Newt Gingrich, Grover Norquist and Dick Armey:[/b][/i] For twisting the truth and leading a well-financed charge to defeat the tax proposal,[i] leaving wealthy corporations rich and the state budget[/i] http://www.washingtonpost.com... drowning in red ink.
[i][b]Troops:--[/b][/i]
[u][b]NICE[/b][/u] - [i][b]U.S. Troops:[/b][/i] For being named [i]TIME's Person of the Year [/i] http://www.time.com/time/pers... "for uncommon skills and service, for the choices each one of them has made and the ones still ahead, for the challenge of defending not only our freedoms but those barely stirring half a world away."
[b][u]NAUGHTY[/u][/b] - [i][b]The Bush Administration:[/b][/i] For trying to [i]roll back recent modest increases in monthly imminent-danger pay [/i] http://www.armytimes.com/arch... (from $225 to $150) and family-separation allowance (from $250 to $100) for American troops.
[b]For the entire [/b][i][b]Naughty & Nice 2003 [/b][/i][b]list refer to [/b] http://www.americanprogress.o...
|
|
|
| |
| Troubling Report From The Pentagon ... |
| 12.27.03 (8:08 am) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" are being defrauded & deceived by the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta [/i]regarding their so-called "[i]progress[/i] (sic)" in Iraq[/b]. The situation there is dire [ http://www.antiwar.com ]-- and while Iraq posed no threat to the U.S.A. prior to the neo-con's immoral & illegal invasion, these mendacious [i]spin-meisters [/i]in the corrupt neo-fascist Bush regime are dispensing neo-orwellian propaganda to persuade the [i]not-terribly-bright [/i]sleepy-headed American public, that capturing Saddam Hussein will [i]speed-up [/i]the so-called "[i]democratization[/i] (sic)" of Iraq ... It has done no such thing ... indeed, the incidents of violence in Iraq are skyrocketing ([i]over 8 U.S. Soldiers have been killed in Iraq over the Christmas holidays http://www.tblog.com/template... , and there is no end-in-sight[/i]!)
Of course, the Iraqi people recognize that the neo-imperial Bush regime are not really interested in "[i]democracy[/i]" ... but instead, intend to economically exploit their country, by raping them of their oil and businessess ... just as the immoral & rapacious Bushies are doing here at home in America ... The Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta [/i]are neo-fascists who are interested in installing their Global Corporate Empire to enrich themselves, while they ruthlessly turn the rest of us into miserable impoverished neo-slaves ...
In "[i][b]Troubling Report from the Pentagon[/b][/i]", published by [i]The Center for American Progress [/i]on http://www.americanprogress.o... , they cite some of the appallingly horrific consequences of the incompetent & recklessly criminal Bush regime's [i]botched-up [/i]war turned bloody guerrilla quagmire in Iraq:--
In mid-November, the Bush Administration announced plans to turn over power to Iraqi authorities on July 1, 2004. On that date, the Coalition Provisional Authority will dissolve and a Transitional Assembly is supposed to assume full sovereign powers for governing the country. With only six months to go, the CPA is hustling to meet the deadline.
Monday morning on NBC's Today Show, CPA Administrator Paul Bremer said he wasn't worried about meeting the ambitious six-month deadline. But the Center for American Progress has received an [i]unclassified Defense Department report [/i]entitled, "[i][b]Draft Working Papers: Iraq Status[/b][/i]" and dated December 15, 2003, that might cause Bremer and his colleagues in the Bush Administration to reconsider and start worrying.
[b][i]Consider these facts from the report[/i][/b]:
[b]Security Forces[/b]: The document reports that the CPA is fully 50 percent short of its current goal of training and staffing the critical Iraqi Border Police Service. Some 12,600 – out of a goal of 27,500 – trained officers are on line, with only 100 in training. This fact, taken together with reports of defections from the first trained units of the new Iraqi army and difficulties in recruiting soldiers, reinforces the view of Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Richard Myers, who has said that July 1 is too optimistic a date for Iraqis to "[i]be able to provide for the external and internal security of the country[/i]." General Ricardo Sanchez has similarly remarked that American forces will be in Iraq for "[i]a couple more years[/i]."
[b]Running Low on Fuel[/b]: The DoD "Iraq Status" report reveals that the CPA is failing to meet its own production goals on diesel fuel (54% of target goal), liquefied petroleum gas (45% of target goal); kerosene (45% of target goal), and gasoline/benzene (64% of target goal). The Pentagon, meanwhile, is [i]forced to rely on fuel shipments from contractors like Haliburton, which is under investigation by DoD auditors for overcharging taxpayers by nearly $100 million[/i].
[b]Energy Crisis[/b]: National electricity production stands at less than 3500 megawatts, far short of the CPA goal of 5,000 megawatts, according to the DoD status report. As the Boston Globe reported last week, the energy crisis is "[i]disrupting the lives not only of the poor but of the middle class, and raising anti-American rage among the people hitherto most inclined to support the US military's seizure of Iraq[/i]." According to the article, the CPA has been unable to fully explain the shortfall and continues to cite an [i]array of problems [/i]ranging from "[i]seasonal adjustments[/i]" to "[i]black market manipulations[/i]."
[b]Phone Connections[/b]: The DoD document reports that "Iraqi Telephone and Posts Company telephone cable splicing efforts [are] falling behind schedule; [and] may delay connecting subscribers several months." As reported in the LA Times last week, "[i]Nearly nine months after much of Iraq's infrastructure and industry was wrecked during the U.S.-led invasion and the rioting that ensued, there is still no way to make a simple telephone call… The lack of service is slowing the recovery of every public and private enterprise and further alienating Iraqis, who are already skeptical of Washington's vision for democracy in their nation[/i]." The [i]Pentagon's decision to investigate the awarding of licenses to those with close ties to Iraqi Governing Council member Ahmed Chalabi has also prolonged the delays[/i].
[b]Education[/b]: DoD reports that "1,812 schools out of 11,939 schools damaged in some way" have been rehabilitated. The document omits references to news reports about "[i]slipshod and wasteful" work on schools by the Bechtel Corporation which holds a USAID contract to rehabilitate more than 1,200 schools[/i]. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reports, "[i]One frustrated American, Maj. Linda Scharf, a civil affairs officer, ordered a survey of 20 Bechtel-repaired schools in her area. She found dangerous debris left in playgrounds, sloppy paint jobs and broken toilets. ‘The work was horrible,' she said[/i]."
[b]Donor Assistance[/b]: A DoD graph indicates that less than $1 billion out of a total $15 billion pledged by international donors has actually been committed. After the October donors' conference, the Administration touted "billions of dollars" pledged to aid the reconstruction of Iraq. However, the New York Times recently reported, "[i]Six weeks after organizers of an international donors conference in Madrid said that more than $3 billion in grants had been pledged to help Iraq with immediate needs, a new World Bank tally verifies grants of only $685 million for 2004[/i]."
Ambassador [i]Bremer's upbeat remarks are particularly curious [/i]in light of a Philadelphia Inquirer report that he has told the [i]Administration he may need as many as 1,000 additional CPA personnel in order to meet the July 1 deadline[/i]. The article says that Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld is "[i]resisting Bremer's request, arguing that the provisional authority should be slimming down, not beefing up, in anticipation of the sovereignty handover[/i]." However, at the same time, the Washington Times cites an internal Pentagon report on the CPA as saying, "[i][b]Resources, particularly personnel, are unavailable or poorly matched to needs[/b][/i]."
[i][b]The DoD status report once again demonstrates the stark contrast between the Administration's rosy public statements and the realities on the ground in Iraq[/b][/i]. The Pentagon – and its Office of Special Plans under Douglas Feith – had access to the extensive analysis done by experts at the State Department. Yet [i]they ignored its recommendations and warnings, failed to plan and built up unrealistic expectations[/i]. This has already cost American taxpayers $87 billion and is likely to cost billions more over the next five years – none of which has yet been requested from the U.S. Congress. Being open about the difficulties in Iraq would be a strong first step to regaining the full trust of the Iraqi people, the men and women of our military, and American taxpayers.
[i][b]For links to specific articles and sources [/b][/i]... http://www.americanprogress.o...
|
|
|
| |
| Will 2004 Be The Year of Issues or Personalities? |
| 12.26.03 (12:26 pm) [edit] |
[b]Will 2004 be the year of[i] issues [/i]or [i]personalities[/i]? ...[/b]
For the future health & well-being of our nation, we had better demand that the media and the press report on the [i]former[/i] ([i]issues[/i]) ... and, then there is a good chance that Bush will be defeated in the 2004 election next November ... but if the mass-appeal of the [i]later[/i] ([i]celebrities and personalities[/i]) becomes the dominating issue, then we are in huge, huge trouble --
Dubya's cynical "[i]handlers[/i]" tell him to say "God Bless America" in order to attract superstitious & lazy Americans, practically every time he fumbles, bumbles & stumbles, through one of his imbecilic screeds ... Dubya, we are told, is a man of God ([i]although he has massacred hundreds of Americans & tens of thousands of innocent Afghanistanis & Iraqis, in order to enrich Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal, etc[/i].) ... Dubya is a phony stage prop who poses with other phony stage props in cynical publicity stunts designed to fool us into thinking that he knows or cares[i] what the hell is going on [/i]-- when instead, Dubya neither knows, nor cares [i]what the hell is going on[/i], so long as he enriches his sordid family, corrupt corporations, and squalid campaign contributors.
[b]"We the People" must take a stand in 2004 that will either change the course of history for the better to save our nation ... or remain with a corrupt neo-fascist regime in the process of undermining our U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights -- destroying our economy by swindling, plundering & looting our U.S. Treasury -- and, dismantling our Republic For Which It Stands[/b].
Consider "[i][b]New Year's Resolutions[/b][/i]" by [i]Dr. Paul Krugman,[/i] N.Y. Times, on http://www.nytimes.com/2003/1... :
During the 2000 election, many journalists deluded themselves and their audience into believing that there weren't many policy differences between the major candidates, and focused on personalities (or, rather, perceptions of personalities) instead. This time there can be no illusions: President Bush has turned this country sharply to the right, and this election will determine whether the right's takeover is complete.
But will the coverage of the election reflect its seriousness? Toward that end, I hereby propose some rules for 2004 political reporting.
• [b]Don't talk about clothes[/b]. Al Gore's endorsement of Howard Dean was a momentous event: the man who won the popular vote in 2000 threw his support to a candidate who accuses the president of wrongfully taking the nation to war. So what did some prominent commentators write about? Why, the fact that both men wore blue suits.
This was not, alas, unusual. I don't know why some journalists seem so concerned about politicians' clothes as opposed to, say, their policy proposals. But unless you're a fashion reporter, obsessing about clothes is an insult to your readers' intelligence.
• [b]Actually look at the candidates' policy proposals[/b]. One key proposal in the State of the Union address will, we hear, be the creation of new types of tax-exempt savings accounts. The proposal will come wrapped in fine phrases about an "ownership society." But serious journalists should tell us how the plan would work, who would benefit and who would lose.
An early version of the plan was floated almost a year ago, and carefully analyzed in the journal Tax Notes. So there's no excuse for failing to report that the plan would probably reduce, not increase, national savings; that it would have large long-run budget costs; and that its benefits would go mainly to the wealthiest few percent of the population.
• [b]Beware of personal anecdotes[/b]. Anecdotes that supposedly reveal a candidate's character are a staple of political reporting, but they should carry warning labels.
For one thing, there are lots of anecdotes, and it's much too easy to report only those that reinforce the reporter's prejudices. The approved story line about Mr. Bush is that he's a bluff, honest, plain-spoken guy, and anecdotes that fit that story get reported. But if the conventional wisdom were instead that he's a phony, a silver-spoon baby who pretends to be a cowboy, journalists would have plenty of material to work with.
If a reporter must use anecdotes, they'd better be true. After the Dean endorsement, innumerable reporters cracked jokes about Al Gore's inventing the Internet. Guys, he never said that: it's a malicious distortion of a true statement, and no self-respecting journalist would repeat it.
• [b]Look at the candidates' records[/b]. A close look at Mr. Bush's record as governor would have revealed that, the approved story line notwithstanding, he was no moderate. A close look at Mr. Dean's record in Vermont reveals that, the emerging story line notwithstanding, he is no radical: he was a fiscally conservative leader whose biggest policy achievement — nearly universal health insurance for children — was the result of incremental steps.
• [b]Don't fall for political histrionics[/b]. I couldn't believe how much ink was spilled after the Gore-Dean event over Joe Lieberman's hurt feelings. Folks, we're talking about war, peace and the future of U.S. democracy — not about who takes whom to the prom.
Political operatives have become experts at manufacturing the appearance of outrage. In the last few weeks the usual suspects have been trying to paint Howard Dean's obviously heartfelt comments about his brother's death in Laos as some sort of insult to the military. We owe it to our readers not to fall for these tricks.
• [b]It's not about you[/b]. We learn from The Washington Post that reporters covering Mr. Dean are surprised — and, it's implied, miffed — that "he never asks a single question about them." The mind reels.
I don't really expect my journalistic colleagues to follow these rules. No doubt I myself, in moments of weakness, will break one or more of them. But history will not forgive us if we allow laziness and personal pettiness to shape this crucial election.
|
|
|
| |
| Promise Them The Moon! |
| 12.24.03 (9:30 am) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" surely are not complete idiots! Or, are we?[/b]
In their infinite cynicism and boundless corruption, the neo-con, neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc [i]junta[/i] recently[i] launched a neo-orwellian "trial balloon"[/i] to see how dumb we really are:-- recognizing that their [i]neo-rapacious economic policies [/i]for the rich, are going to [i]blow-up in their faces politically, not financially as they've enriched themselves (and tragically in our faces economically ...)[/i]... and that their [i]neo-hitlerian foreign policies [/i]are the cause of [i]increased danger, terrorism here at home & abroad, and the slaughter[/i] of tens of thousands of innocent human beings ... they figured that they needed a [i]"good news" stunt[/i] to fool us into thinking that they've got "[i]noble goals[/i] [sic]" ... Ha ha ha ha ha!
The Bushies announced that we may go to the moon, again? (Many certainly do wish that[i] they [/i]would go to the moon ...)
For what purpose? ([i]When Kennedy announced the vision of putting a man on the moon: (1) It had never been done, (2) New technological inventions were created that later benefitted our society, (3) We wanted to beat the Russians to the moon, since they had launched the 1st man into space ...) http://www.historymole.com/cg... [/i]
What will we achieve?
Moreover, who will pay for this? Dubya [i]really does need [/i]a course in 'The Basics of Economics 101' http://www.tblog.com/template... , as he does not seem to realize that he has squandered, plundered & looted our U.S. Treasury for [i]all-it-is-worth-and-mo re [/i]in order to enrich his [i]corporate-take-all [/i]campaign contributors ... creating the largest deficit in our nation's history! Where will the money come from? What is the [i]cost/benefit [/i]analysis? Shouldn't we demand answers to all of these questions? Why should we pay for [i]another imbecilic publicity stunt [/i]to [i]prop-up [/i]the idiot Dubya and his criminal regime of thugs & goons?
Maybe the congenital ne'er-do-well, the Mad King George should plan a "[i]great project[/i]" a little closer to home: [i][b]Universal Health Care, for example?!?!?![/b][/i]
"[i][b]Promise Them The Moon[/b][/i]" published by [i]TomPaine [/i]on http://tompaine.com/op_ads/op... , also [i]makes the point[/i]:
In a desperate search for a bold plan to galvanize the country, the White House recently floated the idea of sending a man to the moon. Again.
But imagine how this country would be transformed if the president rallied the nation to truly accomplish what's now just one of many unfulfilled promises: "leave no child behind."
Twelve million children live below the poverty line and the numbers are increasing even for those [i]whose parents [/i]work. More than 9 million kids under the age of 19 have no health insurance. Thousands of the nation's schools are doomed. Pediatric asthma rates are rising along with air pollution. And massive federal debt looms over future generations.
A White House acting on behalf of our children would craft its policies to address these issues. It would begin by abandoning its efforts to weaken Head Start and dismantle health insurance for poor children. It would fully fund its own No Child Left Behind Act (the president has proposed spending billions less than he promised). It would guarantee that every kid had access to pre-kindergarten education and comprehensive after-school care. And the Clean Air Act would be strengthened, not gutted.
Our country has always risen to great leadership. We could send another man to the moon. But we'd be better served if President Bush had the vision to send millions of healthy, well-educated children into the future.
|
|
|
| |
| Beyond Joblessness: The Bushies Economic Program Benefits Corporations, Not Workers |
| 12.24.03 (8:55 am) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" spend more on credit than any other nation in the world ... [/b]The corrupt neo-fascist corporations and neo-imperial plutocrats encourage fiscal recklessness, rather than financial probity, in order that they can swindle us out of our hard-earned dollars, while their gluttonous greed is the cause of [i]our [/i]dangerous record-level deficits here at home ([i]Dubya spends & We pay the bills[/i]!), and [i]their[/i] immoral & illegal war-mongering for blood-thirsty war-profits abroad.
The tyrannical Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] have purposely engineered a ruthless [i]train-wreck of an economy[/i] here at home, and insane [i]neo-hitlerian wars[/i] abroad-- massacring tens of thousands of innocent human beings in order to profit over-bloated [i]corporate robber-barons[/i], the[i] Bush & Cheney families & cronies[/i], and the [i]richest-of-the-rich top-dogs & fat-cats[/i].
Meanwhile, in the near future ([i]say, just after the 2004 elections in November[/i]), we will face the worst recession in our lifetime ... [i]Prices will skyrocket ... Job losses will continue ... Unemployment benefits will be slashed ... No health care will be available for tens of millions of us ... Poverty and homelessness will become even more prevalent ... and, the rate of Crime, out of desperation, will increase ... [/i] Is this the kind of society that we really want to live in?
[b]Why do the corrupt Bushies want this miserable fate to befall us? [/b][i][b]Because it will drive people to desperation, and force them to become their neo-slaves working for neo-slave wages in their neo-fascist Global Corporate Empire, their Neo-Feudal Slave State[/b][/i].
[b]"We the People" must reject this worst regime in our nation's history in November 2004, for the sake of our nation's health and well-being.[/b]
Consider "[i][b]Un-American Recovery[/b][/i]" by [i]Harold Meyerson[/i] in the Washington Post, on http://www.washingtonpost.com... :
Why is the Bush recovery different from all other recoveries? A slump is a slump is a slump, but it's during recoveries that the distinctive features of a changing economy become apparent. And our current recovery differs so radically from every other bounce-back since World War II that you have to wonder whether we're really talking about the same country.
After inching along imperceptibly for quarter after quarter, the economy is, by some measures, roaring back. The annual growth rate last quarter topped 8 percent, while productivity increased by more than 9 percent. To be sure, employment is still down by 2.4 million jobs since Bush took office, but it's finally begun to rise a bit.
And there are some indices that make even the productivity increases pale by comparison. Corporations have been having a bang-up recovery all along, it turns out; they are about to experience their seventh straight quarter of profit growth. The operating earnings of the 500 companies on the Standard and Poor's index, researchers at Thomas First Call in Boston estimate, will rise by 21.9 percent over last year. Who could ask for anything more?
Well, the American people, for one. Since July the average hourly wage increase for the 85 million Americans who work in non-supervisory jobs in offices and factories is a flat 3 cents. Wages are up just 2.1 percent since November 2002 -- the slowest wage growth we've experienced in 40 years. Economists at the Economic Policy Institute have been comparing recoveries of late, looking into the growth in corporate-sector income in each of the nine recoveries the United States has gone through since the end of World War II. In the preceding eight, the share of the corporate income growth going to profits averaged 26 percent, and never exceeded 32 percent. In the current recovery, however, profits come to 46 percent of the corporations' additional income.
Conversely, labor compensation averaged 61 percent of the total income growth in the preceding recoveries, and was never lower than 55 percent. In the Bush recovery, it's just 29 percent of the new income coming in to the corporations.
Someone with an antiquarian vocabulary might rightly note that this is a recovery for capital, not labor; indeed, that it's a recovery for capital at the expense of labor. But we are none of us antiquarians, so let's just proceed.
There are only a couple of ways to explain how the capacity of U.S. workers to claim their accustomed share of the nation's income has so stunningly collapsed. Outsourcing is certainly a big part of the picture. As Stephen S. Roach, chief economist for Morgan Stanley, has noted, private-sector hiring in the current recovery is roughly 7 million jobs shy of what would have been the norm in previous recoveries, and U.S. corporations, high-tech as well as low-tech, are busily hiring employees from lower-wage nations instead of from our own.
The jobless rate among U.S. software engineers, for instance, has doubled over the past three years. In Bangalore, India, where American companies are on a huge hiring spree for the kind of talent they used to scoop up in Silicon Valley, the starting annual salary for top electrical engineering graduates, says Business Week, is $10,000 -- compared with $80,000 here in the States. Tell that to a software writer in Palo Alto and she's not likely to hit up her boss for a raise.
That software writer certainly doesn't belong to a union, either.
Indeed, the current recovery is not only the first to take place in an economy in which global wage rates are a factor, but the first since before the New Deal to take place in an economy in which the rate of private-sector unionization is in single digits -- just 8.5 percent of the workforce.
In short, what we have here resembles a pre-New Deal recovery more than it does any period of prosperity between the presidencies of the second Roosevelt and the second Bush. The great balancing act of the New Deal -- the fostering of vibrant unions, the legislation of minimum wages and such, in a conscious effort to spread prosperity and boost consumption -- has come undone. (The federal minimum wage has not been raised since 1997.) And the problem with pre-new deal recoveries is that they never created lasting prosperity.
The current administration is not responsible for the broad contours of this miserably misshapen recovery, but its every action merely increases the imbalance of power between America's employers and employees. But the Democrats' prescriptions for more broadly shared prosperity need some tweaking, too. With the globalization of high-end professions, no Democrat can assert quite so confidently the line that Bill Clinton used so often: What you earn is a result of what you learn. This year's crop of presidential candidates is taking more seriously the importance of labor standards in trade accords, and the right of workers to organize. But they've got a way to go to make the issue of stagnating incomes into the kind of battle cry it should be in the campaign against Bush. If they're not up to it, I say we outsource 'em all and bring in some pols from Bangalore.
[b]Other Sources[/b]:
"A Glut of Greenbacks" on http://www.washingtonpost.com...
"Fat cats' pay is the result of greed, not competition: Interchangeable CEOs use imaginary markets to inflate their salaries" on http://www.guardian.co.uk/com...,3604,1112455,00.html
"Savings dwindle as Americans spend, spend, spend" on http://www.forbes.com/persona...
"Ax post-holiday debt - 'Feel-good' spending now may not feel so good later" on http://www.nj.com/business/le...
|
|
|
| |
| It's Greed, Not Ideology, That Rules the White House |
| 12.23.03 (6:51 pm) [edit] |
[b]A person's [i]actions[/i], and not their [i]words[/i], reveal their true [i]motives[/i] ... The corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta's [/i] true[i] motives [/i]have been clear, [i]to all those who closely study their domestic & foreign policies[/i], for a long, long time now ... and as their [i]actions[/i] are criminal, their true [i]motives [/i]are greedy & rapacious ...[/b]
The neo-fascist Bush regime's agenda is strictly profit-oriented ... They have ruthlessly betrayed their oaths of offices ([i]public servants of "We the People"[/i]) in order to enrich themselves, their corporate cronies & their filthy rich campaign contributors ... They have manipulated our tax system for their own squalid private interests, and award massive tax cuts to corporations and the richest among us-- They have swindled, plundered & looted our U.S. Treasury, creating a record-level deficit that will lead us into a miserable recession over the next few years ... with the American middle-class and working people bearing the brunt of their sordid crimes.
Regarding their insane neo-con aggressions into sovereign nations who posed no threat to us ([i]e.g. Afghanistan & Iraq ... the neo-con "crazies" lust for neo-hitlerian wars with Syria, Iran & North Korea ... but Karl Rove has told them to wait until after the 2004 elections![/i]) ... again, it is imperative to "[i][b]Follow the Money[/b][/i]" ...
Consider "[i][b]It's greed, not ideology, that rules the White House - Why the US wants Iraq's debts cancelled - and Argentina's paid in full[/b][/i]" by [i]Naomi Klein [/i]on http://www.guardian.co.uk/com...,3604,1112024,00.html : ................ -[i] Excerpt [/i]-
... The Kissinger transcript proves that the US gave money and political encouragement to the generals' murderous campaign. And yet, despite its now irrefutable complicity in Argentina's tragedy, the US has opposed all attempts to cancel the country's debt. And Argentina is hardly exceptional. The US has used its power in the International Monetary Fund and World Bank to block campaigns to cancel debts accumulated by apartheid South Africa, Marcos in the Philippines, Duvalier's brutal regime in Haiti and the dictatorship that sent Brazil's debt spiralling from $5.7bn in 1964 to $104bn in 1985.
The US position has been that wiping out debts would be a dangerous precedent (and rob Washington of the leverage it needs to push for investor-friendly economic reforms). So why is Bush so concerned that "the future of the Iraqi people should not be mortgaged to the enormous burden of debt"? Because it is taking money from "reconstruction", which could go to Halliburton, Bechtel, Exxon and Boeing.
It has become popular to claim that the White House has been hijacked by neo-conservative ideologues in love with free-market dogma. I'm not convinced. If there's one thing the Wolfowitz/Baker dust-ups make clear, it's that the ideology of the Bush White House isn't neo-conservatism, it's old-fashioned greed. There is only one rule that appears to matter: if it helps our friends get even richer, do it.
Seen through this lens, the seemingly erratic behaviour coming out of Washington starts to make a lot more sense. Sure, Wolfowitz's contract-hogging openly flouts free-market principles of competition. But it does have a direct benefit for the firms closest to the administration. Not only are they buying a debt-free Iraq, but they won't have to compete with their corporate rivals in France and Germany.
The entire reconstruction project defies more neo-con tenets, sending this year's US deficit to a cartoonish $500bn, with plenty handed out in no-bid contracts, creating the kind of monopoly that allowed Halliburton to overcharge by an estimated $61m for importing gasoline into Iraq.
Those looking for ideology in the White House should consider this: [b]for the men who rule our world, rules are for other people. The powerful feed ideology to the masses like fast food while they dine on that most rarefied delicacy: [i]impunity[/i][/b].
[i]Read Naomi Klein's excellent expose on the U.S. Government's policy with regards to Argentina & Kissinger's role therein, and the parallels with Iraq, published in the U.K. Guardian on[/i] http://www.guardian.co.uk/com...,3604,1112024,00.html .
|
|
|
| |
| Dubya Needs An Open University Course in the 'Basics of Economics 101' |
| 12.23.03 (9:13 am) [edit] |
[b]Dubya seems to need an [i]Open University [/i]course in the [i]'Basics of Economics 101' [/i], as even his own Congressional Budget Office are deeply concerned about the future financial chaos that the United States of America will be forced to endure [/b]... once the proverbial[i] ' chickens come home to roost'[/i] ... ([i]Of course, the corporations, wealthiest 5% of the plutocrats, the Bush & Cheney families, and other filthy rich robber-barons have nothing to worry about since they have swindled, plundered & looted the U.S. Treasury to amasse their ill-gotten riches[/i] ...)
It is "We the People" who must bear the back-breaking brunt of the Mad King George's neo-fascist economic policies representing "[i]Welfare for the Rich[/i]" while the rest of us face the heart-breaking consequences of:--
* [i][b]Record level deficits, as far as the eye can see[/b][/i], since Dubya has squandered trillions on corporate interests, insane neo-con 'pre-emptive' ([i]neo-hitlerian[/i]) incursions waged based upon lies, deceptions & falsehoods ... and immoral [i](& illegal[/i]?), anti-christian boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts for corporations & the filthy rich ... Dubya has run-up a $560 billion deficit in 2003 alone and nearly $1.9 trillion for his [i]insane term-in-office[/i].
* Between [i][b]9-15 million unemployed [/b][/i]citizens searching for jobs ([i]that aren't coming back ... only a few jobs are 'trickling' back ...[/i]!) and whose support and aide ([i]unemployment benefits[/i]) are being slashed by the callous & corrupt Bushies ... Dubya wiped out over 3 million jobs (compare that with Clinton who created over 22 million jobs).
* Over [b][i]35 million families living below the poverty line [/i][/b](established in the 1960s ... it is much, much worse) ... Dubya is ignoring the needs of the most vulnerable in our society.
* Over[i][b] 3.5 million citizens are homeless [/b][/i]... Dubya refuses to conduct a new census because experts agree the problem is worse than reported.
* Between [i][b]45-85 million citizens lack health care coverage [/b][/i]... Dubya and his corporate pimps (HMOs. Health Care Insurance Rackets, Pharmaceuticals, etc.) are increasing the costs of health care making it increasingly unaffordable for middle-class and working people ... while these greedy & corrupt [i]top-dogs & fat-cats [/i]reap the profits ... and the elderly and ill either die, go without health care, or are bankrupted and live in misery. (The U.S.A. is the only 1st-tier country in the world with no Universal Health Care System ... although the Majority of Americans Want A Universal Health Care System.)
These are amongst some of the problems caused by the ruthless Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i], who recklessly [i]spend, spend, spend [/i]on the [i]'haves'[/i] ... and ignore the needs of the [i]'have-nots'[/i] ... Sounds like Saddam Hussein, doesn't it! In fact, the GAP between the HAVES and the HAVE-NOTS in the richest nation in the history of the world, is higher than at any time in over 75 years!
"We the People" must take our nation back from these neo-con, neo-fascist swindlers and war-mongers ... They don't represent the best in American values ... indeed, they represent the worst type of criminal elements ...
Consider "[i][b]ECONOMY: The Soft Underbelly[/b][/i]" on http://www.americanprogress.o...%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A52 1-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/031222.HTM#4
[b]According to the Congressional Budget Office[/b] http://www.centredaily.com/ml... , it turns out we can't have our cake and eat it, too. As a new report shows, the country has to either radically rein in spending or increase taxes unless it wants to be hit with giant deficits and "soaring public debt." In fact, the CBO concluded, "Unless taxation reaches levels that are unprecedented in the United States, current spending policies will probably be financially unsustainable over the next 50 years." And while the Bush Administration has said that economic growth will outpace the deficits created by its tax cuts, CBO says "the problem is so immense that economic growth alone will not be enough to solve it." And the country has lost the luxury of time in dealing with the problem: "'The longer that lawmakers delay acting to counter an unsustainable budgetary situation, the larger the spending cuts or tax increases will eventually have to be,' the 60-page study warned." See American Progress's perspectives on current fiscal policies HERE http://www.americanprogress.o... .
[i][b]LEFT OUT IN THE COLD[/b][/i]: Yesterday, "more than 90,000 people who have been out of work for months [lost] their federal benefits" as "the program to aid the long-term unemployed expire[d]." While many progressive lawmakers demanded Congress and the President extend the jobless benefits, both refused, and the cutoffs began on December 21 – and they affect a broad swath of people. According to Maurice Emsellem, public policy director for the National Employment Law Project, "It's a really diverse group of people who are running out of benefits -- higher-income, dot-commers, lower-wage workers, and manufacturing employees. It's people from every industry, from all states...Whatever's going on with the economy, it's not translating into significant job growth."
[i][b]CORPORATIONS TRUMP INDIVIDUALS...AGAIN[/b][/i]: Conservatives like Tom "Nothing is more important in the face of a war than cutting taxes" DeLay claim there is "no reason" to extend benefits to help these struggling Americans. However, at the same time, the House passed an extension for the temporary tax breaks designed to provide relief for corporations during the economic crisis. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, "The House approach implies that corporations need continued support amidst a still-weak economy, but that laid-off workers do not. This is despite the fact that firms might not use the tax breaks to hire new workers." Even by Scrooge standards, this doesn't make economic sense: A study by economy.com concluded that, as a general rule, "each dollar of new federal expenditures for unemployment compensation generated an increase in...GDP of $1.73." The study found, by contrast, that "for each dollar used for...corporate tax breaks...GDP would rise less than $0.35."
[i][b]WORKERS TAKE THE HIT[/b][/i]: Why are so many workers being left out of the economic recovery? According to the NYT, "while profits have shot up as a percentage of national income, reaching their highest level since the mid-1960's, labor's share is shrinking. Not since World War II has the distribution been so lopsided in the aftermath of a recession." Employment rolls are down (2.4 million jobs smaller than when the recession began in March 2001), and the average hourly wage is "rising at an annual rate of less than 2%, barely enough to keep up with inflation, mild as it is now." More and more technological jobs are "offshoring" to India and China, where employees will work for about $20,000 less than here in the states. As the bargaining power of labor has deteriorated over the past decade (thanks to union-busters like Wal-Mart), workers as a whole have suffered the hit. "Rather than increasing output per worker, many companies maintained existing output and raised the productivity growth rate by getting rid of workers." Read University of Georgia guest columnist Jeffrey Wenger's "Jobless Recovery" column HERE http://www.americanprogress.o... .
[i][b]HEALTH CARE HARDSHIP[/b][/i]: As workers remain outside of the recovery loop and require more services from the states, decreased tax revenues in the states have made that harder to achieve. In many cases, something's got to give. Unfortunately for six states, that "something" is health care for poor kids. According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Maryland, Montana and Utah "have stopped enrolling eligible children in their State Children's Health Insurance Programs" due to increased budget pressures. The result? Tens of thousands of kids left uninsured. "Because three of the six states with freezes do not maintain waiting lists, it is impossible to know exactly how many children nationally are affected by the freezes." Florida's waiting list contained more than 44,000 eligible children as of November 14.
[b]Sources[/b]:
Center For American Progress on http://www.americanprogress.o...
"Analysts: Future Budget Outlook Gloomy" on http://www.centredaily.com/ml...
|
|
|
| |
| Can Dubya Keep His Friends? Hmmm ... |
| 12.22.03 (11:18 pm) [edit] |
[b]Can Dubya [i]keep[/i] his friends? Hmmm ... Dubya can certainly [i]buy[/i] his friends [/b]... however, he seems unable to [i]keep[/i] friends that he does not bribe or pay to remain "[i]loyal[/i]".
The hypocritical Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta [/i]have used the U.S. Treasury as their own private ATM to award massive immoral, anti-christian boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts to corporations, the wealthiest plutocrats & their campaign contributors-- while the rest of us are saddled with his back-breaking record-level deficits, heart-breaking job losses, a scandalous health care crisis, skyrocketing poverty & homelessness ... etc. The neo-fascist Bushies have [i]"lined-their-own-pocke ts-with-gold" [/i]... and these ruthless thugs & goons do not give a damn about the working people, the powerless and the vulnerable in our society.
The neo-cons are reckless gamblers with our nation's citizenry ([i]who are slaughtered by the hundreds & maimed-and-injured by the thousands, in their insane 'pre-emptive' guerrilla quagmires[/i]) and our nation's treasure ([i]that they recklessly squander to enrich themselves[/i]) ... and they will leave a [i]mess[/i] for the rest of us to struggle to recover from:-- our foreign policy is a shambles, since most nation's fear & hate us, because Bush has stupidly squandered the good will of others ... and, economic policies that have enabled corporations & the filthy rich to mercilessly swindle, plunder & loot America's middle-class, lower-income workers and the poor.
Now, it seems that Dubya can't even keep his single "[i]friend[/i]": Tony Blair ... Dubya seems to be one of those despicable type of crooks whom: [i]the more one gets to know him, the less one likes him [/i]... This is hardly surprising, given that he lacks true character, real courage, deep intelligence and any wisdom whatsoever.
"We the People" should beware of Bush's incompetence and inability to deal with leaders on the world stage ... His[i] bully-boy [/i]tactics are becoming increasingly tiresome, boring and dangerous for our nation at home and abroad.
Consider "[b]BUSH AND BLAIR: THE BIG FALL-OUT: Relations in 'deep freeze' since Saddam caught[/b]" published in the[i] U.K. Daily Mirror [/i]on http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk... :
TONY Blair and George Bush's love-in has collapsed over the rebuilding of Iraq.
The two leaders have fallen out over plans for the reconstruction of the country and the heavy-handed action of American troops against the civilian population.
And the rift has been deepened by a Washington ban on a proposed morale-boosting visit by the PM to British troops in Iraq during the Christmas holiday.
According to diplomats, relations between the allies have gone into "deep freeze" since the capture of Saddam Hussein last weekend.
President Bush was incensed that Mr Blair stole Washington's thunder by being the first Western leader to confirm that the former dictator had been arrested by US troops.
Downing Street rushed out Mr Blair's announcement before he had spoken to the American leader early last Sunday, when Mr Bush - six hours behind London - was still in bed.
Whitehall insiders confirmed that Mr Blair's decision was partly out of anger over a US veto on his proposed visit to British troops in Iraq during the Christmas holiday.
Presidential advisers in Washington wanted Mr Bush to be the sole leader to make a Christmas visit to troops in Baghdad and urged Downing Street to postpone any visit.
The US refused to co-operate on security arrangements for a Christmas visit by Mr Blair, who is going to spend the festive season with his family in the Egyptian resort of Sharm al-Sheikh.
Mr Blair and Mr Bush have had at least three phone conversations during the past seven days which Whitehall officials described as "increasingly terse".
A Downing Street insider said: "Relations between the two are at the lowest ebb since they first met.
"The PM is not happy at having to deal with Britain's European partners who have been left out of the rebuilding contracts. Of course they are still talking - but the diplomatic temperature is in the deep freeze."
Mr Blair has expressed his concern over Mr Bush's decision to rule Germany, France and other European countries out of the running for lucrative contracts in the reconstruction of Iraq.
The American President declared that countries which didn't support the war will not be awarded any of the rebuilding contracts. Mr Blair has complained that the move severely weakened Britain's strength in the European Union and contributed to the failure of last week's crucial EU summit.
In recent phone conversations with Mr Bush, Mr Blair has also expressed worries about heavy-handed US tactics against Iraqi civilians.
|
|
|
| |
| 76 Reasons To Impeach Bush/Cheney! |
| 12.22.03 (6:26 pm) [edit] |
[b]The corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta [/i] has misled us into immoral & illegal incursions turned bloody guerrilla quagmires in Afghanistan & Iraq, and have created a [i]'train-wreck' of an economy [/i]here at home-- both devised to enrich their rapacious corporate cronies, their sordid families and their greedy & squalid campaign contributors.[/b] ([i]Refer to sources listed below[/i].)
"We the People" should demand that our unpatriotic rubber-stamp neo-con Congress http://www.congress.org conduct impeachment hearings in order to [i]oust[/i] the neo-fascist Bush/Cheney thugs & goons from office. Their priorities are focused on enriching corporations, at any cost-- and the damage being done to our economy, our citizens and to the health of this nation is criminal.
[b]You might find the following enumeration of specifics regarding the Bush regime's destructive policies in their first year in office, worth perusing:-- ...
... 76 additional patriotic reasons to impeach Bush/Cheney on http://www.electricemperor.co... are as follows:--[/b]
[b]STATE OF THE PRESIDENT on
[i]In George W. Bush's First year in office he[/i][/b]:
0. After the "Great Appointed", he left the Pentagon open to attack by ending a 16 year multi tiered tatical responce team, began by his father, and added to by President Clinton. Then, too late, calls F-15s from Langley Virginia, 120 miles & 20 minutes away. Instead of Andrews Air Force Base only 10 miles away. At the very least, Criminal Negligence.
1. Significantly eased field-testing controls of genetically engineered crops.
2. Cut federal spending on libraries by $39 million.
3. Cut $35 million in funding for doctors to get advanced pediatric training.
4. Cut by 50% funding for research into renewable energy sources.
5. Revoked rules that reduced the acceptable levels of arsenic in drinking water.
6. Blocked rules that would require federal agencies to offer bilingual assistance to non-English speaking persons. This, from a candidate who would readily fire-up his Spanish-speaking skills in front of would- be Hispanic voters.
7. Proposed to eliminate new marine protections for the Channel Islands and the coral reefs of northwest Hawaii (San Francisco Chronicle, April 6, 2001).
8. Cut funding by 28% for research into cleaner, more efficient cars and trucks.
9. Suspended rules that would have strengthened the government's ability to deny contracts to companies that violated workplace safety, environmental and other federal laws.
10. OK'd Interior Department appointee Gale Norton to send out letters to state officials soliciting suggestions for opening up national monuments for oil and gas drilling, coal mining, and logging.
11. Appointed John Negroponte - an un-indicted high-level Iran Contra figure-to the post of United Nations Ambassador.
12. Abandoned a campaign pledge to invest $100 million for rain forest conservation.
13. Reduced by 86% the Community Access Program for public hospitals, clinics and providers of care for people without insurance.
14. Rescinded a proposal to increase public access to information about the potential consequences resulting from chemical plant accidents.
15. Suspended rules that would require hardrock miners to clean up sites on Western public lands.
16. Cut $60 million from a Boy's and Girl's Clubs of America program for public housing.
17. Proposed to eliminate a federal program, designed and successfully used in Seattle, to help communities prepare for natural disasters.
18. Pulled out of the 1997 Kyoto Treaty global warming agreement.
19. Cut $200 million of work force training for dislocated workers.
20. Eliminated funding for the Wetlands Reserve Program, which encourages farmers to maintain wetlands habitat on their property.
21. Cut program to provide child care to low-income families as they move from welfare to work.
22. Cut a program that provided prescription contraceptive coverage to federal employees (though it still pays for Viagra).
23. Cut $700 million in capital funds for repairs in public housing.
24. Appointed Otto Reich - an un-indicted high-level Iran Contra figure - to Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs.
25. Cut Environmental Protection Agency budget by $500 million.
26. Proposed to curtail the ability of groups to sue in order to get an animal placed on the Endangered Species List.
27. Rescinded the rule that mandated increased energy-saving efficiency regulations for central air conditioners and heat pumps.
28. Repealed workplace ergonomic rules designed to improve worker health and safety.
29. Abandoned campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide, the waste gas that contributes to global warming.
30. Banned federal aid to international family planning programs that offer abortion counseling with other independent funds.
31. Closed White House Office for Women's Health Initiatives and Outreach.
32. Nominated David Lauriski - ex-mining company executive - to post of Assistant Secretary of Labor for Mine Safety and Health.
33. OK'd Interior Secretary Gale Norton to go forth with a controversial plan to auction oil and gas development tracts off the coast of eastern Florida.
34. Announced intention to open up Montana's Lewis and Clark National Forest to oil and drilling.
35. Proposes to re-draw boundaries of nation's monuments, which would technically allow oil and gas drilling "outside" of national monuments.
36. Gutted White House AIDS Office.
37. Renegotiating free trade agreement with Jordan to eliminate workers's rights and safeguards for the environment.
38. Will no longer seek guidance from The American Bar Association in recommendations for the federal judiciary appointments.
39. Appointed recycling foe Lynn Scarlett as Undersecretary of the Interior.
40. Took steps to abolish the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
41. Cut the Community Oriented Policing Services program.
42. Allowed Interior Secretary Gale Norton to shelve citizen-led grizzly bear re-introduction plan scheduled for Idaho and Montana wilderness.
43. Continues to hold up federal funding for stem cell research projects.
44. Makes sure convicted misdemeanor drug users cannot get financial aid for college, though convicted murderers can.
45. Refused to fund continued cleanup of uranium-slag heap in Utah.
46. Refused to fund continued litigation of the government's tobacco company lawsuit.
47. Proposed a $2 trillion tax cut, of which 43% will go to the wealthiest 1% of Americans.
48. Signed a bill making it harder for poor and middle-class Americans to file for bankruptcy, even in the case of daunting medical bills.
49. Appointed a Vice President quoted as saying "If you want to do something about carbon dioxide emissions, then you ought to build nuclear power plants." (Vice President Dick Cheney on "Meet the Press.")
50. Appointed Diana "There is no gender gap in pay" Roth to the Council of Economic Advisers. (Boston Globe, March 28, 2001.)
51. Appointed Kay Cole James - an opponent of affirmative action - to direct the Office of Personnel Management.
52. Cut $15.7 million earmarked for states to investigate cases of child abuse and neglect.
53. Helped kill a law designed to make it tougher for teenagers to get credit cards.
54. Proposed elimination of the "Reading is Fundamental" program that gives free books to poor children.
55. Is pushing for development of small nuclear arm to attack deeply buried targets and weapons, which would violate the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.
56. Proposes to nominate Jeffrey Sutton - attorney responsible for the recent case weakening the Americans with Disabilities Act- to federal appeals court judgeship.
57. Proposes to reverse regulation protecting 60 million acres of national forest from logging and road building.
58. Eliminated funding for the "We the People" education program which taught School children about the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and citizenship.
59. Appointed John Bolton - who opposes nonproliferation treaties and the U.N. - to Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security.
60. Nominated Linda Fisher - an executive with Monsanto - for the number-two job at the Environmental Protection Agency.
61. Nominated Michael McConnell - leading critic of the separation of church and state - to a federal judgeship.
62. Nominated Terrence Boyle - ardent opponent of civil rights - to a federal judgeship.
63. Canceled 2004 deadline for automakers to develop prototype high mileage cars.
64. Nominated Harvey Pitts - lawyer for teen sex video distributor - to head SEC.
65. Nominated John Walters - strong opponent of prison drug treatment programs - for Drug Czar. (Washington Post, May 16, 2001.)
66. Nominated J. Steven Giles - an oil and coal lobbyist - for Deputy Secretary of the Interior.
67. Nominated Bennett Raley - who advocates repealing the Endangered Species Act - for Assistant Secretary for Water and Science.
68. Is seeking the dismissal of class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. against Japan by Asian women forced to work as sex slaves during WWII.
69. Earmarked $4 million in new federal grant money for HIV and drug abuse prevention programs to go only to religious groups and not secular equivalents.
70. Reduced by 40% the Low Income Home Assistance Program for low-income individuals who need assistance paying energy bills.
71. Nominated Ted Olson- who has repeatedly lied about his involvement with the Scaiffe-funded "Arkansas Project" to bring down Bill Clinton - for Solicitor General.
72. Proposes to ease permit process - including environmental considerations - for refinery, nuclear and hydroelectric dam construction. (Washington Post, May 18, 2001.)
73. Proposes to give government the authority to take private property through eminent domain for power lines and gas pipelines.
74. Proposes that $1.2 billion in funding for alternative renewable energy come from selling oil and gas lease tracts in the Alaska National Wildlife Reserve.
75. Plans on serving genetically engineered foods at all official government functions.
76. Forced out Forest Service chief Mike Dombeck and appointed a timber industry lobbyist as his replacement.
"[i]What is the problem, oh Babylon?
Lack of information...mon,
That's all." [/i]
[b]... And this list doesn't even include the many, many crimes & frauds perpetrated by Bush/Cheney ever since![/b]
[b]Sources[/b]:
"76 Patriotic Reasons to Impeach Bush/Cheney!" on http://www.electricemperor.co...
"Leading Economist Confirms That Bush's Economic Policies Are Failing America" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"U.S. Class & Income Inequality Is At The Highest Point In Over 75 Years" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"The Poverty Quagmire in America" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Financial Analysts Confirm That Bush Has Placed The U.S.A. In Economic Peril" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"WANTED: A Real Economic Program - Instead of Mad King George's Swindle of America" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"U.S. Homelessness & Poverty Worsens Under The Rapacious Bush Regime" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Leading Economist Confirms That Bush's Economic Policies Are Failing America |
| 12.22.03 (12:07 pm) [edit] |
[b]One leading economist, amongst many ([i]e.g. Dr. George Akerlof, Dr. Paul Krugman, etc.[/i] http://www.drizzten.com/blarg... ) , confirms that Bush's[i] rapacious economic policies [/i]for the corporations & the rich are [i]failing the United States of America.[/i] [/b]
Our nation is not comprised [i]simply[/i] of corporate top-dogs & fat-cat, rich robber-barons & wealthy plutocrats-- who are the only citizens deserving of the bounty of our collective work, efforts, blood, sweat & tears. Yet, this is how the the corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] behave, as they award immoral, anti-christian [i](& possibly illegal[/i]) boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts to powerful corporations and their hyper-rich campaign contributors ... as this neo-con, neo-fascist cabal neglect the dire problems of rising unemployment, poverty, homelessness, our health care crisis, education, social security & our nation's welfare.
"We the People" must take back our nation from these neo-con, neo-fascist tyrants and despots who are swindling, plundering and looting the American middle-class, working people and the most vulnerable among us.
It does not require a [i]nobel-prize [/i]to recognize that when the needs of the people are ignored and the profits from our nation's collective labour are being funnelled into the bulging pockets of the[i] corporate-take-all [/i]robber-barons & the filthy rich plutocrats-- that the masses will suffer in misery. After all, isn't that what the hypocritical Bushies [i]lectured us [/i]on regarding [i]Saddam Hussein's Iraq[/i]?
Consider "[i][b]Economic Recovery Remains Vulnerable to Setbacks[/b][/i]" by Robert J. Shapiro on http://www.americanprogress.o... :
[b]Overview[/b]
My quarterly analysis of the economy shows growth moderating after accelerating sharply in the third quarter, producing respectable gains in the fourth quarter and into 2004. Yet, the economy is also quite vulnerable to setbacks. Despite the recent strong growth, [i]the number of people working, which fell for two years, is rising very slowly[/i]. Despite rising stock prices and confidence, [i]consumption could slow significantly[/i]. Despite strong productivity gains, [i]real wage growth has slowed substantially[/i]. [i][b]Finally, the huge current account deficit is driving down the dollar and may drive up interest rates in 2004[/b][/i].
GDP grew at an extraordinary 8.2 percent annual rate in the third quarter. Business fixed investment improved in every category and posted its greatest gains since the first quarter of 2000. In addition, consumption grew at its strongest pace since the third quarter of 1997, and housing investment surged faster than any quarter since early 1992.
Growth will not maintain this pace in the fourth quarter and in 2004. The acceleration in consumer spending in the third quarter was driven by a 26.5 percent annualized increase in durable-goods purchases, following a convergence of tax rebates, large incentives for auto purchasers, and surging mortgage refinancing. These factors will not come together again. Consumption already is in retrenchment. With little room for interest-rate cuts, housing investment will cool off. Business fixed investment is the critical area likely to continue to grow rapidly, supported by rising corporate profits and low inventory levels.
The outlook for growth in 2004 is both positive and negative. In addition to business investment, fast-rising productivity could support further expansions in consumer spending, and the continuing fall in the dollar may reduce the trade deficit. But there are trapdoors under some of the basic elements of growth. First, Americans borrow to consume, and household debt and debt service levels both have reached record or near-record highs. These burdens will weaken consumer spending if productivity gains fail to translate into significant wage and salary increases next year, as they have since April, and the job market remains sluggish. Gains in business and consumer spending also could be limited by high energy prices, especially if a cold winter pushes prices higher. Finally, pressures to finance the record current account deficit may limit the growth of business investment or, if we’re unlucky, slow the economy by driving up interest rates.
We can expect 3.5 percent to 3.8 percent growth in the fourth quarter, producing overall GDP gains of 3.0 percent to 3.2 percent for 2003. Next year’s outlook is more problematic. The likelihood is that we will see 3.3 percent to 3.6 percent growth in 2004, but problems with consumption and interest rates could well mean slower growth.
[b]U.S. Economic Performance Over the Past Year[/b]
The economy, which nearly stalled in the last quarter of 2002 and the first quarter of 2003, strengthened across the board over the past six months (Figure 1). For the first time since the 2001 recession, the economy shows signs of self-sustaining momentum. While the growth spurt of the third quarter depended on temporary factors, rising productivity and the gathering strength of business investment and exports will tend to produce respectable growth through 2004.
[b]The Components of Growth[/b]
The improvement in the economy is clear when we examine the contribution of each of GDP’s major components, taking account of each element’s performance and its role in overall growth over the past year (see Figure 2, below). The last quarter of 2002 and the first quarter of 2003 produced shallow and spotty gains; but by the second quarter, the gains were larger though still uneven, dominated by consumer purchases and federal spending for the Iraq war. However, business investment also turned around in the second quarter. In the third quarter, consumption, investment and housing all grew very substantially, while government spending and volatile inventory investment played much more modest roles.
[b]The Economy's Prospects Over the Next Year[/b]
Most private forecasters are very bullish about growth in the fourth quarter and next year. A recent survey of Wall Street and corporate forecasters reported a consensus for 4 percent growth in the fourth quarter and 4.3 percent growth in 2004. My view is more skeptical. The outlook for business investment is clearly strong: Rising corporate earnings will provide the cash to maintain current levels of capital spending; and ending the recent inventory liquidation cycle would add 1.2 percentage points to fourth-quarter growth. But consumption and housing have begun to fall back: Real consumer outlays, which rose at an 8 percent rate from April to August, contracted in September and October; and new home sales fell 1.9 percent in September and 3.5 percent in October.
The expansion will soon be buffeted by powerful conflicting forces. In addition to rising business investment, continuing fiscal stimulus should support spending; and stronger growth in Europe and Japan, combined with a weaker dollar, should reduce the trade deficit’s current drag on growth. But 2004 also could well see much slower spending by consumers. Substantial productivity gains–averaging more than 5.5 percent for the last two years–should continue, but rising productivity of late has generally failed to lift incomes: Gains in average hourly earnings have fallen 110 basis points since February, and pretax wages have been flat for the past three months. There is also little pent-up spending demand, because auto and home sales have been unusually strong for some time. To pick up strength, the expansion also has to create more jobs. Finally, without more income tax reductions or interest rate cuts, high debt levels and a continuation of the current slowdown in hourly wage gains will slow consumption spending.
And no one expects the Federal Reserve to further reduce interest rates next year. Falling rates provided crucial support for housing and consumer spending in the third quarter, as in the preceding two years. While the Federal Reserve has signaled its intention to keep interest rates low for the next few months, a shift in the Fed’s inflation assessment next year will signal higher rates, which will likely slow the economy, at least modestly.
Financing pressures associated with our huge current account deficit could trigger those rates next year. As the current account deficit has passed 5 percent of GDP, the dollar has fallen substantially against the euro; but it has declined much less against the yen and not at all against China’s yuan. Managing this record deficit depends on foreign investors being willing to continue to accumulate dollar assets almost without limit. If foreign preferences for those assets shift to any appreciable degree under pressure from our unprecedented financing demands, it will force us to raise interest rates, slowing growth.
[b]U.S. Labor Markets: Continuing Problems with Job Creation[/b]
For the first time, an expansion failed to produce new jobs for almost two years. In prior postwar recoveries, private-sector jobs increased by an average of 5.5 percent in the first two years. This time, private employment is still down 1 percent, producing a shortfall of 7 million jobs. And recent research indicates that 80 percent of the job losses in 2001 and 2002 are permanent and structural, rather than cyclical and temporary. Firms did finally start creating net jobs four months ago, but average gains of 75,000 jobs/month are one-fourth the average monthly gains from 1995 to 2000.
Unless this dynamic changes soon, job creation will remain weak, and that will ultimately limit the strength and duration of the expansion.
One key factor noted in prior reports is the unusually combination of strong productivity gains and sub-par GDP growth. U.S. productivity rose 2 percent in 2001 despite a recession, jumped 5.3 percent in 2002, and so far this year has risen at a 6 percent rate. Normally when productivity increases rapidly, consumption and investment rise even faster, which in turn drive overall growth and job creation (see Figure 3, 1997-2000, below). This time, growth was relatively slow until the third quarter and job creation has been stalled, because below-average increases in consumption and investment accompanied the above-average productivity gains.
Another important factor is the increasing capacity of U.S. service companies, like their manufacturing counterparts, to outsource new, higher-skill jobs to low-wage countries. As expected, this new form of global labor arbitrage is most notable in firms exposed to strong international competition, including wholesale distribution, air transport, finance, telecommunications and information services. One result is that while nearly half of all U.S. industries report some modest hiring in the last three months, nearly 80 percent of new hires are concentrated in four, non-tradable industries–education and health services, temporary staffing, and government.
[b]Consumer Spending and Housing Investment[/b]
With consumption spending accounting for two-thirds of GDP, the pace of the expansion will depend significantly on consumers. In the first half of 2003, consumer spending was supported by gains in personal income based on rising productivity, and by large-scale mortgage financing spurred by falling interest rates (in the past two years, half of all U.S. homeowners refinanced $4.5 trillion in mortgage debt). In the third quarter, income tax rebates further boosted consumer spending, producing its strongest gains in six years.
Strong productivity gains are likely to continue, but consumer spending could still slow significantly in 2004. The continuing problems with job creation may undermine consumer confidence and spending. There is also evidence that recent productivity gains have been based more on cost-cutting than productive investment, weakening the link between rising productivity and higher incomes: Despite large productivity increases, gains in average hourly earnings have fallen by 110 basis points since February, and pretax wages have been flat for the past three months.
Other factors also may undermine consumer demand next year. The recent, sharp increase in consumer purchases has exhausted much of any pent-up demand, especially for durable goods. In a related development, household debt rose 11 percent over the last two quarters, the fastest increase in almost 20 years; and debt service now claims a record 13 percent of disposable incomes, despite the lowest interest rates in 45 years. Finally, with interest rates no longer falling and likely to rise in 2004, mortgage refinancing also will likely slow substantially.
Historically-low interest rates made housing investment a major support of the current recovery, especially in 2003. Most analysts trace the third-quarter jump in housing investment to the Fed’s second quarter interest-rate reduction. Two factors, however, could end the current housing cycle next year. First, with the federal funds rate at 1 percent, the Federal Reserve has little if any room left to cut interest rates further. Moreover, after 11 years or nearly twice the length of the average postwar housing cycle, there is relatively little pent-up demand for new housing.
Rising interest rates pose the greatest threat to a strong expansion in 2004, through their direct and indirect effects on both consumer spending and housing investment. For the first time since the 1990s boom, long-term interest rates rose sharply this summer: From mid-June to mid-August, rates for conventional 30-year fixed mortgages and AAA corporate bonds increased more than 20 percent, and the yield on 10-year Treasury bonds jumped 37 percent. Since August, rates have generally stabilized. Should they rise again in 2004, as many analysts expect, it will slow the growth of consumer spending and could end the current housing cycle.
[b]Business Investment[/b]
Sustained business investment is the strongest current support for the expansion in 2004. In the second and third quarters of this year, business investment overall and in equipment and software saw their strongest gains since the 1990s. And there is ample room for more gains: Real business investment in the third quarter was 7 percent lower than it was in 2000 and 2 percent below the average levels during the 2001 recession.
Business investment should also grow fairly rapidly in the fourth quarter and into 2004. Inventory levels have fallen so low that merely ending the inventory liquidation of the past two quarters would add 1.2 percentage points to fourth-quarter growth. Further, U.S. corporations are currently generating sufficient cash flow to finance their own investment needs, which is one reason why credit demand is still declining at the large banks that usually finance new investments by large firms.
[b]The Current Account Deficit, the Dollar, and Savings Rates[/b]
The current account deficit has been deteriorating sharply since early 2002 and poses a genuine threat to the expansion over the next two years. The data for the first three quarters of 2003 show that current account stabilizing at quarterly deficit levels of $135 billion to $140 billion, about 5 percent of GDP. There is little likelihood of any significant change in the near term. The largest element, the trade deficit, remains persistently high: The deficit in goods and services was $120.8 billion in the third quarter, compared to $121.6 billion and $122.6 billion in the first and second quarters. The trade imbalance was $41.8 billion in October, compared to monthly averages in the first three quarters of $40.3 billion to $40.9 billion. Over the first three quarters, the trade deficit ran 21 percent above the comparable period in 2002. The major reason is rapid growth of imports: U.S. imports in 2003 have grown 8.5 percent as exports rose 3.2 percent. We expect a trade deficit this year of $485 billion (4.4 percent of GDP) and a current account deficit of $550 billion (5.0 percent of GDP).
Low U.S. saving rates are the major factor in the current account deficit. U.S. gross saving in 2003 is 14 percent of GDP, down from 15.5 percent in 2002 and a postwar average of 18.8 percent. Depreciation accounts for 92 percent of those gross saving, for a net saving rate of roughly 1 percent of GDP. To finance new investment as well as rising budget deficits, we now borrow $2 billion per business-day from abroad; by the end of 2004, our foreign borrowing could reach $3 billion per business-day. Moreover, dollar depreciation has not yet worked to correct the current account imbalance. The dollar’s trade-weighted value is down 12 percent since early-2002, with the largest shift occurring against the Euro, 29.7 percent. By contrast, foreign intervention has blocked any adjustment with the Yuan and limited the decline against the Yen to less than 20 percent.
In recent weeks, the dollar’s depreciation accelerated as global confidence decline in both the currency and Bush administration policies. Since November 6, the dollar’s trade-weighted value has fallen 2.2 percent or almost 20 percent of its total decline since February 2002. In the past six weeks, the dollar also has fallen 7.4 percent against the euro or 19.2 percent of its total decline against the euro in almost two years, and 2.6 percent against the yen or almost 13 percent of its total two-year decline.
One way or another, the current account deficit will slow U.S. economic growth. A major increase in saving rates would help reduce the imbalance, but by reducing consumption. More likely, foreign lenders will demand higher compensation for accepting such extensive dollar-currency risk, which will push up U.S. interest rates and thereby dampen investment and consumption. Or some of our large foreign creditors could hedge their bets by liquidating their dollar holdings, triggering a full-blown dollar crisis that would drive up interest rates and drive down U.S. stocks, bonds and growth.
[i][b]Robert J. Shapiro is co-founder and chairman of Sonecon, LLC, a private firm that advises U.S. and foreign corporations, governments and other entities on market conditions and economic policy. He also is a senior fellow of the Brookings Institution and the Progressive Policy Institute[/b][/i].
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Economists Against Bush Tax Plan: 10 Nobel laureates among them" on http://www.drizzten.com/blarg...
"Long-term Tax and Budget Issues" on http://www.ombwatch.org/budge...
"The cost of health care begins to afflict voters" on http://www.boston.com/news/na...
"Across US, jobless losing benefits - Proposals that would extend aid spark debate" on http://www.boston.com/news/na...
|
|
|
| |
| "Selective Memory and a Dishonest Doctrine" by Noam Chomsky |
| 12.22.03 (10:53 am) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" have a very short and selective collective memory ... Perhaps this is due to the fact that our young nation (228 years old) was founded by revolutionaries who rejected the status quo, despised their monarch and the despotic system of rule in the England of the 18th century-- and had a great idea for a [i]Republic [/i]in which all men could enjoy the right of [i]Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness[/i]. Yet these courageous founding fathers were considered terrorists and risked their lives, limbs & properties in their Revolutionary War-- and were prepared to [i]break-with-the-past[/i ] ... And, yet they were well-read men, who [i]did not forget the lessons of the past [/i]and established a U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights to keep corrupt profiteers and criminals from hijacking our nation for their private gain[/b].
Benjamin Franklin was disappointed however, upon reading the U.S. Constitution and warned that this new system of democratic rule might work for a while, but that Americans would become corrupted and only be satisified to be ruled by ruthless tyrants & despots http://www.nybooks.com/articl... . One could be forgiven for fearing that his dire prediction came true after only 200 years ... For, from the Reagan era onwards, our nation has been hijacked by corporations and the wealthy plutocrats, whose greedy desire for infinite power & riches, is turning us into a neo-feudal slave state in which the people are neo-serfs exploited to feed the insatiable greed & lust of our neo-ruler's Global Corporate Empire.
The corrupt Bush regime represents the apex of this neo-con, neo-fascist state-- as even now, their many, many crimes are either buried by their bulldozers in the [i]extreme right-wing neo-orwellian[/i] media & press ... and, their [i]rubber-stamp [/i]Congress has become an arrogant cabal of whorish thugs & goons who traitorously carry-out the wishes of their [i]corporate-take-all [/i]pimps, leaving our people in an increasingly desperate[i] 3rd-world-style [/i]economy & insane neo-con 'pre-emptive' ([i]immoral & illegal[/i]) war-mongerings on behalf of their neo-fascist war-profiteers ... And yet, why do "We the People" accept this sordid & squalid [i]state-of-affairs[/i]? Have we become so corrupted, as Benjamin Franklin predicted, that we are only satisified with these cynical, tyrannical rulers? ... Will we awaken from our self-delusion and re-claim our heritage that no man ([i]not even a president[/i]) is above the rule of law? ... These are questions which we as a nation owe to ourselves to ponder and reflect upon ...
[b]Professor Noam Chomsky [/b]is one of the few intellectuals in America who attempts to enlighten us upon the nature of our ruler's actions ... [i][b]Read on ...[/b][/i]
[b]"Selective Memory and a Dishonest Doctrine" by Noam Chomsky [/b]on http://www.commondreams.org/v... :
All people who have any concern for human rights, justice and integrity should be overjoyed by the capture of Saddam Hussein, and should be awaiting a fair trial for him by an international tribunal.
An indictment of Saddam's atrocities would include not only his slaughter and gassing of Kurds in 1988 but also, rather crucially, his massacre of the Shiite rebels who might have overthrown him in 1991.
At the time, Washington and its allies held the "strikingly unanimous view (that) whatever the sins of the Iraqi leader, he offered the West and the region a better hope for his country's stability than did those who have suffered his repression," reported Alan Cowell in the New York Times.
Last December, Jack Straw, Britain's foreign secretary, released a dossier of Saddam's crimes drawn almost entirely from the period of firm U.S.-British support of Saddam.
With the usual display of moral integrity, Straw's report and Washington's reaction overlooked that support.
Such practices reflect a trap deeply rooted in the intellectual culture generally — a trap sometimes called the doctrine of change of course, invoked in the United States every two or three years. The content of the doctrine is: "Yes, in the past we did some wrong things because of innocence or inadvertence. But now that's all over, so let's not waste any more time on this boring, stale stuff."
The doctrine is dishonest and cowardly, but it does have advantages: It protects us from the danger of understanding what is happening before our eyes.
For example, the Bush administration's original reason for going to war in Iraq was to save the world from a tyrant developing weapons of mass destruction and cultivating links to terror. Nobody believes that now, not even Bush's speech writers.
The new reason is that we invaded Iraq to establish a democracy there and, in fact, to democratize the whole Middle East.
Sometimes, the repetition of this democracy-building posture reaches the level of rapturous acclaim.
Last month, for example, David Ignatius, the Washington Post commentator, described the invasion of Iraq as "the most idealistic war in modern times" — fought solely to bring democracy to Iraq and the region.
Ignatius was particularly impressed with Paul Wolfowitz, "the Bush administration's idealist in chief," whom he described as a genuine intellectual who "bleeds for (the Arab world's) oppression and dreams of liberating it."
Maybe that helps explain Wolfowitz's career — like his strong support for Suharto in Indonesia, one of the last century's worst mass murderers and aggressors, when Wolfowitz was ambassador to that country under Ronald Reagan.
As the State Department official responsible for Asian affairs under Reagan, Wolfowitz oversaw support for the murderous dictators Chun of South Korea and Marcos of the Philippines.
All this is irrelevant because of the convenient doctrine of change of course.
So, yes, Wolfowitz's heart bleeds for the victims of oppression — and if the record shows the opposite, it's just that boring old stuff that we want to forget about.
One might recall another recent illustration of Wolfowitz's love of democracy. The Turkish parliament, heeding its population's near-unanimous opposition to war in Iraq, refused to let U.S. forces deploy fully from Turkey. This caused absolute fury in Washington.
Wolfowitz denounced the Turkish military for failing to intervene to overturn the decision. Turkey was listening to its people, not taking orders from Crawford, Texas, or Washington, D.C.
The most recent chapter is Wolfowitz's "Determination and Findings" on bidding for lavish reconstruction contracts in Iraq. Excluded are countries where the government dared to take the same position as the vast majority of the population.
Wolfowitz's alleged grounds are "security interests," which are non-existent, though the visceral hatred of democracy is hard to miss — along with the fact that Halliburton and Bechtel corporations will be free to "compete" with the vibrant democracy of Uzbekistan and the Solomon Islands, but not with leading industrial societies.
What's revealing and important to the future is that Washington's display of contempt for democracy went side by side with a chorus of adulation about its yearning for democracy.
To be able to carry that off is an impressive achievement, hard to mimic even in a totalitarian state.
Iraqis have some insight into this process of conquerors and conquered.
The British created Iraq for their own interests. When they ran that part of the world, they discussed how to set up what they called Arab facades — weak, pliable governments, parliamentary if possible, so long as the British effectively ruled.
Who would expect that the United States would ever permit an independent Iraqi government to exist? Especially now that Washington has reserved the right to set up permanent military bases there, in the heart of the world's greatest oil-producing region, and has imposed an economic regime that no sovereign country would accept, putting the country's fate in the hands of Western corporations.
Throughout history, even the harshest and most shameful measures are regularly accompanied by professions of noble intent — and rhetoric about bestowing freedom and independence.
An honest look would only generalize Thomas Jefferson's observation on the world situation of his day: "We believe no more in Bonaparte's fighting merely for the liberties of the seas than in Great Britain's fighting for the liberties of mankind. The object is the same, to draw to themselves the power, the wealth and the resources of other nations."
[i]Political activist and author [b]Noam Chomsky [/b]is a professor of linguistics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His new book is "Hegemony or Survival: America's Quest for Global Dominance (The American Empire Project)" http://www.amazon.com/exec/ob... [/i]
|
|
|
| |
| U.S. Class & Income Inequality Is At The Highest Point In Over 75 Years |
| 12.21.03 (9:02 pm) [edit] |
[b]A research study conducted by the [i]University of California at Berkeley[/i] http://www.berkeley.edu/news/... reveals that class and income inequality is at the highest point in over 75 years. Under the Bush regime, this trend is tragically deteriorating rapidly with a minority of very wealthy plutocrats ([i]top 5% income bracket[/i]) getting [i]much, much richer[/i], and everyone else becoming [i]much, much poorer[/i]. http://www.census.gov/prod/20... [/b]
"We the People" are witnessing the purposeful ugly design of a calamitous society in which the majority of Americans are being engineered to slavishly serve at the whim of the powerful corporations and wealthy plutocrats. Our lives are too precious to be forced into a neo-Dark Ages without workers rights, living wages, social security, health care and other basic needs-- We workers must be bold and claim our rightful share of the bounty produced from our blood, sweat and tears ... Without our labour, the corporate robber-barons & filthy rich top-dogs & fat-cats would starve ... The [i]corporate-take-all [/i]politicos are not entitled to rape us of living wages, services and safety-nets necessary to live in dignity and decency-- in order that these gluttonous, anti-christian neo-cons can fulfill their ghoulish lusts for infinite power & wealth.
[b]Yet, this inequitable, unjust and miserable retrograde neo-feudal society envisioned by the neo-fascists,[i] is not inevitable[/b][/i]. [b]The people of our nation have a tradition of resisting and fighting slavery [/b]... and together we must fight this new pernicious form of enslavement:-- not based upon race, but instead upon economic class and income status. Let us reject the neo-cons' insane vision of a neo-Dark Age to feed their greedy and insatiable Global Corporate Empire-- and let us demand a new Age of Enlightenment that brings forth a Great Society for All.
[b]Isn't it time for a War on Poverty? ...[/b]
Consider "[i][b]Growing class inequality and stagnant wages are by design not accident, say six UC Berkeley sociologists in a combined analysis[/b][/i]" on http://www.berkeley.edu/news/... :
[b]Berkeley -- Over the past twenty years, the United States has "dismantled" many of its historic structures for spreading wealth out among the people, which goes far toward explaining the growing gap between rich Americans and everyone else in the country, according to six sociologists at the [i]University of California at Berkeley[/i].[/b]
"The current level of inequality is neither inevitable nor tied to talent; it is a matter of choice," the sociologists concluded after a year of combining their expertise to expose the root causes of inequality.
Their analysis traces the outlines of far-reaching changes in the balance of power between workers, corporations and communities that once allowed most Americans to share in expanding affluence.
It also provides a new perspective on why working people have lost so much ground since the 1970s, even while productivity has continued to rise, and it offers some solutions.
Two of the structures that have been dismantled, according to these sociologists, are strong unions and the rootedness of corporations in given communities. Neither has been lost because of so-called natural forces in the economy, but because of political decisions, the authors say. They argue that the resulting imbalance has led to an increasing concentration of wealth at the top.
"The United States is now more unequal than at any point in the last 75 years," the sociologists write. "We are choosing our level of inequality by the rules we make, including how we regulate corporations and unions, how we distribute the tax burden and how we set wages."
This diagnosis of growing inequality in the United States comes from a unique collaboration among six professors of sociology at UC Berkeley: Claude S. Fischer, Michael Hout, Martín Sánchez-Jankowski, Samuel R. Lucas, Ann Swidler, and Kim Voss.
The six worked for a year to synthesize their knowledge across broad academic fields including economic stratification, labor, education, poverty, race and American social history. They have written a book, titled "Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth" which begins with an analysis of genetic sources of inequality and ends with a broad societal view.
Prior to the book's publication by Princeton University Press in September, the group has written a working paper which takes aim at[i][b] five myths of inequality[/b][/i]:
[i]* Inequality is inevitable
* Inequality reflects differences in talent
* Inequality is necessary to promote economic growth
* Stagnant wages are the just desserts of unproductive workers
* Reducing inequality will require huge federal programs.[/i]
The group is currently presenting the working paper titled "Myths about inequality in the United States," at universities around the country and abroad.
In the paper, they demonstrate that class inequality is greater in this country than in any other industrialized nation, mostly because of recent corporate and political decisions.
They show that workers in European countries as well as in the United States have had to deal with globalization of trade and new technology, but only workers in the U.S. have lost so much ground. Only in the United States has the gap between rich people and everyone else become dramatically bigger.
A main reason for the greater inequality in the U.S. is weak unions, the group writes. Moreover, they say, direct union-busting policies, combined with labor laws that discourage strikes, lie at the heart of this weakness. They say a deliberate assault on unionization is responsible for the rapid loss of union membership in the past twenty years.
Compared to other industrialized nations, the rate of unionization in the United States is extremely low today, according to Kim Voss, one of the six who is an authority on the history of labor.
Unionization in Canada, for instance, stands at 35 percent of the workforce, more than double the U.S.'s 15 percent. Other countries all have higher rates than the United States: Japan's rate is 27 percent, Germany's, 34 percent and Sweden's, 85 percent, in 1989 figures, said Voss.
In 1980, a quarter of America's workers were in unions, still low compared to other nations, but strong enough, the sociologists say, to counterbalance the pull of employers and stockholders when it came to sharing the riches.
"It used to be that every time a CEO started to raise his own salary or dividends to stockholders, a union man would be sitting in his office. As a result, every increase in productivity was rewarded by higher wages. That face-to-face confrontation does not take place much anymore," said Michael Hout, director of UC Berkeley's Survey Research Center.
Hout said the link between wages and economic growth, which rose together from the turn of the century, was broken in the mid 1970s.
As graphic evidence of this change, the UC Berkeley group points to new data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics which shows that compared to earlier years, workers' wages have not kept pace with increases in productivity since 1974. Instead, the gains in productivity -- which has continued to climb upwards for 40 years -- have all been taken in the past twenty years by corporate officers and stockholders, say the authors.
The UC Berkeley group cites evidence that, in 1974, American chief executive officers made $35 for every worker's dollar. American CEOs now make over $200 for every worker's dollar, a 500 percent increase in twenty years. By comparison, the ratio of CEO-to-worker compensation in Germany is DM21 to 1.
Also, between 1974 and today, the Dow Jones Industrial Average has more than tripled, from 1500 to more than 5500. By contrast, the average working wage has remained static and blue-collar wages have actually declined, the sociologists show.
As another example of inequality by design, the sociologists point out that American CEO's, who receive stock options, have a direct stake in what happens to shares on the stock market. By contrast, in Japan, top corporate officials cannot own stock in their own company and therefore have no personal incentive for driving up its price.
"We choose to make these rules," said Claude Fischer, one of the six authors who wrote the book's final draft. "To assume they are natural and can't be changed is silly."
But reducing inequality will take political courage and the willingness to look at what other nations have done, the authors point out.
As a prime example, they reached the conclusion that national wage setting policies as carried out in Germany are the most important way to limit marketplace dynamics that create growing levels of inequality.
"In Germany, owners and workers bargain through national associations, arriving at wage policies that ultimately are accepted in most, if not all, workplaces in the industry. The worker-employer agreements are binding in all union settings. In practice, they are usually extended also to non-union settings as well," said Hout.
By contrast, Voss added, "the American pattern is for everybody to bargain individually which creates wide differences in wages from place to place. As a result, employers have an incredible incentive to break unions."
She said that they also have strong incentives to pull up roots and move from one community or state to another in search of better labor and tax deals.
"National wage negotiation would be a huge leap for the United States, but well worth the risk," said Hout.
[b]Other Sources[/b]:
"The Death of Horatio Alger" by Dr. Paul Krugman on http://www.thenation.com/doc....
"U.S. Census Report: Poverty in the USA (2002)" on http://www.census.gov/prod/20...
|
|
|
| |
| Will the Bush/Cheney Inc. Junta Rig the 2004 Elections? |
| 12.21.03 (2:27 pm) [edit] |
[b]Will the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] rig the 2004 elections?[/b] ... It is a fair question, since they rigged the 2000 presidential election ([i]Jeb did a real good job of keeping Democratic voters away from the polls & refusing to count the votes of those who were not for Bush ... Dubya did a good job in manipulating the U.S. Military votes:-- counting & including late ballots for Bush, and rejecting & not counting the same type of votes cast for Gore ... Daddy Bush did a real good job getting his appointees (whores) on the Supreme Court to refuse to count Americans' votes ... and ensuring their votes would not be counted[/i].) Many prominent legal scholars consider that the [i]Bush vs. Gore [/i]decision http://writ.news.findlaw.com/... will go down in history as the worst Supreme Court decision since Dred Scott -- as it represented an undemocratic unravelling of the heart of democracy: [i]A Citizen's Right To Vote & Have Their Votes Counted Justly & Fairly[/i].
[b]Americans throughout history have fought and died for the right to vote and have our votes counted-- Nothing is more sacred in a democracy than our only voice: [i]Our Vote[/i]! It is essential to our "Freedom of Speech", as our elected representatives listen to us because they know we have the power to re-elect them or reject them ... If they believe we have no power, they will no longer listen to us or respect us. Our Vote Must Count![/b]
Now we are [i]face-to-face [/i]with a corrupt neo-fascist [i]win-at-all [/i]cost cabal of thugs & goons willing to do anything, absolutely anything to grab power & riches, even at the peril of our nation:--
Can our Republic stand another[i] banana republican coup d'etat[/i]? The neo-cons don't want a democratic system of government, here at home, or in Iraq, or anywhere. The neo-fascist PNAC "crazies" want to rule over a neo-feudal slave state serving their Global Corporate Empire.
The Chief Executive Officer of Diebold Election Systems Inc., Walden O'Dell is "[i]committed[/i]" to getting Dubya re-elected http://www.commondreams.org/h... ... and this is truly frightening, as these ruthless & reckless swindlers have no respect for the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights ... they have no respect for the rule of law ... and, they have no respect for "We the People". Diebold Election Systems Inc. has a squalid and sordid track-record of sloppiness, covering-up their errors & problems, and, of extreme right-winged biased patronage in favour of the corrupt Bush regime.
It is imperative to contact Congress on http://www.congress.org and demand that all Electronic Voting machines be re-called until their defects are corrected:-- ... paper ballots & audit trails are properly implemented ... independent testing, auditing & public reporting by outside auditors takes place ... multiple reconciliation systems for independent & accurate vote counting are installed and verified. Our vote is our only voice, and if the neo-stalinist Bushies take that away-- then we will become a dictatorship ruled over by tyrants and despots.
[b]Remeber that Joseph Stalin said "[i]Those who [u]cast[/u] the votes decide nothing. Those who [u]count[/u] the votes decide everything[/i]." Al Gore is able attest to that ... If "We the People" stand for this heinous corruption of our system, then we leave a tragic legacy of tyranny and criminality to future generations of Americans. Let us prove Joseph Stalin WRONG![/b]
Consider "[i][b]E-Voting Undermined by Sloppiness[/b][/i]" on http://www.wired.com/news/evo...,2645,61637,00.html :
[b]SACRAMENTO, California -- An audit of Diebold Election Systems voting machines in California has revealed that the company installed uncertified software in all 17 counties that use its electronic voting equipment[/b].
While 14 counties used software that had been qualified by federal authorities but not certified by state authorities, three counties, including Los Angeles, used software that had never been certified by the state or qualified by federal authorities for use in any election.
California certification procedures require that voting systems be qualified by independent testing authorities at the federal level and certified by the National Association of State Election Directors before the state can certify them for use.
Diebold admitted wrongdoing Tuesday at a meeting of the state's Voting Systems Panel, or VSP, and said it was making changes to its procedures for upgrading its systems.
But Secretary of State Kevin Shelley, who made an unprecedented appearance before the VSP, said he was disturbed by the company's actions and would not rule out the possibility of decertifying the machines in California.
"The core of our American democracy is the right to vote," Shelley said. "Implicit in that right is the notion that that vote be private, that vote be secure, and that vote be counted as it was intended when it was cast by the voter. And I think what we're encountering is a pivotal moment in our democracy where all of that is being called into question."
State undersecretary and panel chairman Mark Kyle said the VSP needed additional information before it decides whether Diebold should be sanctioned for violating state election code. But he noted that because of the widespread nature of the uncertified installations the "concern is greater now than it was a month ago." A decision is expected next month.
The audit was ordered last month after the VSP learned Oct. 29 that the company installed uncertified software on systems in two California counties that use its touch-screen voting machines. The software was used in at least two elections, including the gubernatorial recall in October.
A source in the secretary of state's office said a Diebold employee provided the information.
Concerned that the problem might extend to Diebold optical scan machines used in other counties, the VSP ordered a statewide audit of Diebold's machines to be paid for by the company. Diebold submitted a check for $75,000 earlier this month to cover the review.
The audit looked at all versions of Diebold hardware such as touch-screen machines and optical scan units, the firmware installed on those machines and the software used on the server end to collect and tabulate votes.
The audit uncovered discrepancies between what Diebold said was installed in counties and what auditors actually found.
At least five counties were using versions of software or firmware that were different from what Diebold indicated they were using.
All counties were using uncertified software, but the most serious issues related to the tabulation software known as GEMS, or global election management system. GEMS sits on a server in each county election office, counting the votes and producing summary reports of totals.
Although the last version of GEMS certified in California was 1.17.17, auditors found that no county was using it. Instead they were using later versions such as 1.17.20, 1.17.23 and 1.18.18.102. Versions 1.17.20 and 1.18.18.102 were never qualified by federal independent testing authorities.
Auditors couldn't examine eight machines in various counties because they failed to boot up when turned on. Another 12 machines were in the Diebold plant in McKinney, Texas, being repaired.
The extent of the changes that Diebold made to upgrades of its software is still unknown. Documentation to determine this was provided too late for the VSP meeting this week. The documentation includes release notes that software makers produce with each version of a program indicating what changes were made in the system.
The VSP scheduled another meeting for next month to give its technical consultant time to review the release notes.
Marc Carrel, assistant secretary of state for policy and planning, said he was "disgusted" by the situation and worried that it could call into question any close races that might have occurred in three counties that used federally unqualified software.
"The vendor may not understand that we run elections in the state. We set the standards for certification ... and that's our role. Ignoring that role is serious. And I'm frustrated ... that we're not going further today," he said. "There certainly needs to be something done to this vendor."
Carrel said he was not opposed to forwarding the information to the attorney general or a district attorney's office if it came to that.
"We were negligent from our company standpoint not to notify the state (of the changes)," Diebold president Bob Urosevich told the panel. "I'm here, obviously, to make sure that that does not happen in the future."
Urosevich said problems occurred because regional employees handled upgrades and modifications to systems. He said the company has since centralized the process so that modifications and certification will be processed through a single channel by one authority to ensure that it's all done properly.
The report also confirmed what critics have been saying for some time: that the certification processes and procedures for implementing voting systems are deeply flawed.
It revealed that lax accounting procedures at both the county and state levels failed to track what software was being used. Some counties failed to keep logs tracking the system versions they were using; others kept inconsistent logs.
When some counties sent machines out for repair they failed to record what versions of software were on the machines before sending them to Diebold. Counties also did not have procedures to determine if Diebold installed new software on machines before returning them.
Shelley acknowledged responsibility for the failure of his own office to track what systems were in place and said changes would be made. He said he hoped the statewide review wouldn't result in the decertification of Diebold systems or the systems of other vendors.
"But if we find that there are gross discrepancies and violations, I am prepared to go down that road," he warned.
Shelley's statements were met with applause from the audience.
To bring all 17 counties into line with current software versions, the state plans to update all GEMS to version 1.18.18. Panel chairman Kyle said this probably could be accomplished in a week. Four counties already have it installed on servers.
However, there is conflicting information about whether 1.18.18 has been certified by federal authorities. Tony Miller, head of special projects in the voting division, said he believed the system was qualified in July, but had conflicting reports about whether or not it had been certified by the National Association of State Election Directors. The state has not been able to uncover any documents that indicate this was done.
Shawn Southworth, who qualifies voting software for independent testing authority Ciber, told Wired News last week at a conference in Maryland that the software has not yet been certified federally.
"I want to see a paper from a credible source that it has been federally qualified," Miller said.
In addition to upgrading the GEMS version in counties, the VSP will audit all California voting systems belonging to other vendors, which should take three months. The state plans to establish a technical oversight committee comprised of computing experts, which would advise the VSP panel and staff on issues related to voting system security and testing.
The state will institute a bi-annual review of voting systems as well as conduct random audits. Officials are looking at establishing a security fund supported by an annual fee from vendors to cover costs of the audits and bi-annual review.
The state also is looking at procedures for distributing software to counties through its elections division to better control installations. And it wants better training for poll workers to help monitor voting fraud and system tampering during elections.
Carrel told Wired News that the state has to send a signal to vendors that "there are rules that they better follow or else there are consequences."
|
|
|
| |
| The Poverty Quagmire in America |
| 12.21.03 (10:27 am) [edit] |
[b]Poverty is a quagmire in America ...[/b]
How can "We the People" sit back and blithefully fall for the insane neo-orwellian propaganda being propagated by the corrupt neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] & their neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters? ... The profits from the slim growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is primarily being funnelled into the bulging pockets of corporate executives & the richest plutocrats, while they swindle, plunder & loot our U.S. Treasury and rape American workers out of jobs, pension plans, overtime pay, health care, social security, and anything else they can think of, in order to turn us into their neo-slaves!
The [i]corporate-take-all [/i]Bush regime choose to ignore the real problems of poverty, job loss, our health care crisis, homelessness and crime caused by [i]all of the above[/i]-- and instead, they focus their neo-fascist attentions on [i]spending-us-into-a-tra in-wreck[/i] of an economy in order to provide gigantic anti-christian, immoral [i](& possibly illegal[/i]) boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts for corporations, the wealthiest 5% plutocrats, their greedy campaign contributors, and their sordid & squalid selves ... No one with an [i]iota of brain-matter [/i]is investing in the Stock Market Swindle-- since the corrupt Bush regime and their corporate [i]rapists-in-arms [/i]([i]e.g. their buddy Kenny-boy (Enron) Lay is still at large[/i]) [i]took-the-money-and-ran [/i], and they have broken their promise ([i]yet again[/i]) to make systemic changes to halt the corporate accounting fraud & embezzlement that enables these plunderers and looters to continue to [i]cook-the-books[/i]!
The United States of America is the richest nation in the history of the world, and yet, the rapacious & ruthless Bushies have re-distributed the wealth of from the American middle-class & working people, to their gluttonous filthy rich top-dogs & fat-cats, creating the highest gap between the [i]haves-and-the-have-not s[/i], since the Great Depression. Moreover, the imbecilic ne'er-do-well Dubya ignores:--
* Between[i] [b]9-15 million citizens are unemployed and seeking jobs[/b] [/i]([i]in an economy where Bush destroyed over 3 million existing jobs -- Clinton created over 22 million new jobs during his administration[/i])
* Over [i][b]35 million families live below the poverty line[/b][/i] ([i]established in the 1960s ... it is much, much worse[/i])
* Over [i][b]3.5 million citizens are homeless[/b][/i], and it is rapidly deteriorating under the Bush regime ([i]who do not want a census count taken[/i])
* Between [i][b]45-85 million citizens are without health care coverage[/b][/i] -- ([i]and it is getting worse as private corporations are increasing the costs of health care to grab profits for over-bloated executive pay-packages, making it affordable for the wealthy & increasingly unaffordable & unobtainable for the rest of us ...[/i]) ... [b][i]The U.S.A. is the only 1st-tier nation not to have Universal Health Care, although the majority of Americans want a National Health Care System[/i][/b].
[b]But if the Bush Regime's Global Corporate Empire doesn't want [i]it[/i] ... we won't get [i]it[/i] ... just like the [i]banana republican coup d'etat [/i]election results will be rigged and shoved down our throats, yet again![/b]
Consider "[i][b]The Poverty Quagmire[/b][/i]" by Timothy M. Smeeding, The Washington Post, on http://www.washingtonpost.com... :
"[i]We have in 1964 a unique opportunity and obligation -- to prove the success of our system; to disprove those cynics and critics at home and abroad who question our purpose and our competence[/i]." - President Lyndon B. Johnson in his 1964 State of the Union Address.
[b]As the 40th anniversary of the[i] War on Poverty [/i]approaches[/b], Johnson's words are a cutting reminder of a war that we have not won. Indeed, it is a war we have not even fought. Still, it has its casualties: They are the children and grandchildren of the same people LBJ spoke of 40 years ago.
[i]According to data in the Luxembourg Income Study, child poverty is significantly higher in the United States than in wealthy European nations and in Canada and Australia. In 1997 -- in the midst of a robust economy -- one in five American children lived in poverty. This is about double the rate in other wealthy industrialized nations, such as France, Germany and the Nordic countries[/i].
We in America have high child poverty rates because we choose to, not because we cannot do anything about it. Other nations make different choices and get different results. For example, Tony Blair lifted Britain's spending on poor families with children by 0.9 percent of GDP. The result? Britain's high child poverty rate is ebbing as ours continues to climb. The United States could commit half the effort of Tony Blair's government and see a seismic shift in the well-being of millions of children.
The truth is that America tolerates -- even accepts -- persistent child poverty. Our education system reflects it, as do our tax policy, child care policy and child support policy.
We say that we will leave no child behind, but in fact we continue to drag millions of children behind each year. And the reality is that they may never catch up and become fully participating members of society. Poor children in France, Germany and the Nordic countries are six times more likely to escape poverty than their American counterparts.
Fully one-third of children of single mothers in the United States today are not just poor but extremely poor. As the study data indicate, low-income single mothers in the United States work more hours than do single mothers in any other wealthy nation, yet have higher poverty rates.
Decades of economic growth have not lifted the worst-off Americans to a higher standard of living. Ten percent of America's children are so impoverished that their normal health and growth are seriously at risk.
Every policy decision has its consequences. We spend billions caring for our elderly through successful and cherished federal programs. We spend money here and shed blood abroad to fight against terrorism. These are difficult and complex decisions, but policymakers do find the will to make them. That has not been the case when it comes to child poverty. Efforts that simply attempt to change the behavior of people living in poverty, and put the blame entirely on them, will fail. Working hard is simply not enough. The government needs to support people, not merely threaten them. Or else, 40 years from now, a future government will be threatening their children.
Preventing future generations of children from growing up poor, undereducated and malnourished has been perpetually on America's "to do" list. Nearly seventy years ago we made a commitment to deal with old-age poverty, and we have been fairly successful in doing so. Nothing on that scale is being seriously considered in Washington to deal with our children.
Johnson's 1964 State of the Union address sounds ominous now: "[i]If we fail, if we fritter and fumble away our opportunity in needless, senseless quarrels . . . then history will rightfully judge us harshly. But if we succeed, if we can achieve these goals by forging in this country a greater sense of union, then, and only then, can we take full satisfaction in the State of the Union[/i]."
President Bush cannot truthfully declare the state of the Union strong in the face of the harsh facts of life for America's poor children. In this holiday season he should truly dedicate America to fighting the [i]War on Poverty[/i] that was proclaimed nearly 40 Christmases ago but never fought. There are millions of ground troops in our schools, on our streets, in our places of worship and in our government to support such an effort, if policymakers would stop dragging their heels and dragging our children behind them.
[i]Timothy M. Smeeding is co-author, with Lee Rainwater, of "Poor Kids in a Rich Country: America's Children in Comparative Perspective," published by the Russell Sage Foundation. He is also director of the Luxembourg Income Study, a project that assembles income data from a number of countries[/i].
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Financial Analysts Confirm That Bush Has Placed The U.S.A. In Economic Peril" onhttp://www.tblog.com/template...
"WANTED: A Real Economic Program - Instead of Mad King George's Swindle of America" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"U.S. Homelessness & Poverty Worsens Under The Rapacious Bush Regime" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Send Bush & Cheney on the 'Walk a Mile' Project" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Where Are The Jobs?" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Bush Economy Enriches Corporate Swindlers: GAP Between Haves & HaveNOTs Skyrockets" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Majority of Americans Call for Universal Health Care" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Neo-Fascist Bushies Conduct Public Business Out Of The Public Eye |
| 12.21.03 (9:35 am) [edit] |
[b]The neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] have forgotten that the United States of America is not their private empire, corporation, kingdom or playground [/b]... The Mad King George and his corrupt cabal of neo-con thugs & goons are supposed to be public servants accountable to "We the People" ... Our public business must not be conducted in secret ... Our public business must remain in the public eye ... "We the People" have the right to know how our public affairs are being administered:-- the criteria upon which decisions are made, by whom they are decided, and for whom they benefit ... whose interests are served!
Instead, the neo-con Bushies defy their oaths of offices as defined in the U.S. Constitution ... they trample on our rights and tread on our freedoms as enshrined in the Bill of Rights ... they undermine the rule of law ... they unilaterally break international treaties and laws ... they fabricate neo-orwellian propaganda ... they are swindling, plundering & looting our nation's wealth to enrich themselves & their corporate campaign contributors ... they ignore court orders ... they wage immoral & illegal "pre-emptive" wars to grab power & wealth ... All of this, based upon a pack of horrendous lies, deceptions & falsehoods-- To sum up: the traitorous Bush regime should be tried for [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i].
U.S. News reports in "[i][b]Keeping Secrets: The Bush administration is doing the public's business out of the public eye. Here's how--and why[/b][/i]" on http://www.usnews.com/usnews/... : -[i] Excerpt [/i]-
"[b]Democracies die behind closed doors[/b]."
--[i]U.S. APPEALS COURT JUDGE DAMON J. KEITH[/i]
At 12:01 p.m. on Jan. 20, 2001, as a bone-chilling rain fell on Washington, George W. Bush took the oath of office as the nation's 43rd president. Later that afternoon, the business of governance officially began. Like other chief executives before him, Bush moved to unravel the efforts of his predecessor. Bush's chief of staff, Andrew Card, directed federal agencies to freeze more than 300 pending regulations issued by the administration of President Bill Clinton. The regulations affected areas ranging from health and safety to the environment and industry. The delay, Card said, would "ensure that the president's appointees have the opportunity to review any new or pending regulations." The process, as it turned out, expressly precluded input from average citizens. Inviting such comments, agency officials concluded, would be "contrary to the public interest."
Ten months later, a former U.S. Army Ranger named Joseph McCormick found out just how hard it was to get information from the new administration. A resident of Floyd County, Va., in the heart of the Blue Ridge Mountains, McCormick discovered that two big energy companies planned to run a high-volume natural gas pipeline through the center of his community. He wanted to help organize citizens by identifying residents through whose property the 30-inch pipeline would run. McCormick turned to Washington, seeking a project map from federal regulators. The answer? A pointed "no." Although such information was "previously public," officials of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission told McCormick, disclosing the route of the new pipeline could provide a road map for terrorists. McCormick was nonplused. Once construction began, he says, the pipeline's location would be obvious to anyone. "I understand about security," the rangy, soft-spoken former business executive says. "But there certainly is a balance--it's about people's right to use the information of an open society to protect their rights."
For the past three years, the Bush administration has quietly but efficiently dropped a shroud of secrecy across many critical operations of the federal government--cloaking its own affairs from scrutiny and removing from the public domain important information on health, safety, and environmental matters. The result has been a reversal of a decades-long trend of openness in government while making increasing amounts of information unavailable to the taxpayers who pay for its collection and analysis. Bush administration officials often cite the September 11 attacks as the reason for the enhanced secrecy. But as the Inauguration Day directive from Card indicates, the initiative to wall off records and information previously in the public domain began from Day 1. Steven Garfinkel, a retired government lawyer and expert on classified information, puts it this way: "I think they have an overreliance on the utility of secrecy. They don't seem to realize secrecy is a two-edge sword that cuts you as well as protects you." Even supporters of the administration, many of whom agree that security needed to be bolstered after the attacks, say Bush and his inner circle have been unusually assertive in their commitment to increased government secrecy. "Tightly controlling information, from the White House on down, has been the hallmark of this administration," says Roger Pilon, vice president of legal affairs for the Cato Institute.
[b]Read the remainder of this fascinating report [/b]on http://www.usnews.com/usnews/...
[b]Other topical readings[/b]:
"Corrupt Bush White House Covers-Up Their Sordid & Squalid Track-Record ..." on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"WANTED: A Real Economic Program - Instead of Mad King George's Swindle of America" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Bush Regime Operates In An Anti-Democratic Veil-of-Secrecy" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Financial Analysts Confirm That Bush Has Placed The U.S.A. In Economic Peril |
| 12.21.03 (7:30 am) [edit] |
[b]Respectable financial analysts and economists, here at home and abroad, all agree that the corrupt Bush regime has placed the U.S.A. in economic peril[/b].
The neo-con Bushies have swindled, plundered & looted America in order to enrich themselves, their [i]corporate-take-all[/i] cronies, and the wealthiest among us. We are witnessing the largest re-distribution of wealth from the middle-class and working people to the corporations and the top 5% plutocrats, since the Great Depression.
"We the People" must demand a halt to the rapacious economic "[i]train-wreck[/i]" that the neo-fascist Bushies have engineered to transform our nation into a neo-feudal slave state to serve their neo-imperial Global Corporate Empire. Our U.S. Treasury is not the neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] private ATM ... although they are unlawfully acting like it is!
Consider "[i][b]Analysts: Future Budget Outlook Gloomy - Analysts Find Future Budget Outlook Gloomy Even With Higher Taxes, Spending Restraint[/b][/i]" on http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Po... :
[b]WASHINGTON Dec. 20 [/b]— Keeping the federal budget at or near balance over the next 50 years could require painful tax increases, spending cuts or both, the Congressional Budget Office says.
In a look at the government's long-term budget outlook, Congress' nonpartisan fiscal analyst offered possible combinations of tax and spending changes, all of which would leave lawmakers choosing among politically unpalatable options.
Even so, some still would leave the government in fiscal peril. Yet, failing to act would drive the accumulated federal debt to unsustainable levels, said the study, released Friday.
"Taken to the extreme, such a path could result in an economic crisis," including the possibilities that foreign investors would pull out, the dollar's value plunge, interest rates and prices soar and stock markets collapse.
"The longer that lawmakers delay acting to counter an unsustainable budgetary situation, the larger the spending cuts or tax increases will eventually have to be," the 60-page study warned.
The big problem facing the government is the impending retirement of the baby boom generation, whose 76 million members will start later this decade relying on Social Security and Medicare and increase their use of Medicaid.
The budgets for those automatically paid benefits are also growing as medical costs continue to soar. The three programs provide pensions and medical insurance for the elderly, disabled and poor.
Social Security is so large, and Medicare and Medicaid are expanding so rapidly, that limiting the growth of defense, education and other spending that Congress controls would not be enough for sound budget policy, the report said.
"Substantial reductions in the projected growth of spending or a sizable increase in taxes as a share of the economy or both will probably be necessary to provide a significant likelihood of fiscal stability in the coming decades," the report said.
The study compared current and future spending and revenues to the size of the U.S. economy, now about $11 trillion. Economists consider the resulting percentage a useful way to measure the federal budget over time, because it illustrates how affordable particular programs or policies might be.
In the study, the budget office offered six hypothetical scenarios for restraining spending and raising taxes through 2050.
Highlighting how dire the long-range budget picture is, even the scenarios that let trillions of dollars in tax cuts enacted under President Bush expire, which would bring in piles of new revenue, would mean that "fiscal stability is not assured."
Of the six scenarios, three offered the chance of balanced budgets in 50 years.
But of the three, two used the politically unlikely assumption that the Bush tax reductions would expire. The third incorporated the improbable scenario that spending for Medicare and Medicaid would not keep pace with health-care costs, that spending for other benefits would shrink compared to the economy's size, and that other domestic programs would grow only with inflation.
In another scenario, revenues would rise from their current 16.2 percent of the economy to their historic 18.4 percent average, and spending for all programs but Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid would be less than half their current 9.6 percent of the economy. But "to prevent an indefinite spiraling of federal debt," spending on those three benefit programs would grow by no more than 0.5 percent annually over inflation, the report said.
The report's conclusions echoed numerous similar studies that have been done in recent years. But coming just as the calendar is to turn to a presidential and congressional election year, both parties tried using it to buttress their arguments for their favored budget policies.
"If spending is left unchecked, it could have a disastrous effect on the economy," said Rich Meade, Republican staff director of the House Budget Committee. "The bottom line is deficits do matter, and we need to address them."
Thomas Kahn, his Democratic counterpart, said, "[i][b]The worst thing we could do is approve the Republican agenda, because its extra $1 trillion in new tax cuts would make the long-term budget problem even worse[/b][/i]."
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"WANTED: A Real Economic Program - Instead of Mad King George's Swindle of America" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"U.S. Homelessness & Poverty Worsens Under The Rapacious Bush Regime" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Corrupt Bush White House Covers-Up Their Sordid & Squalid Track-Record ..." on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Take Action: Stop War-Profiteering |
| 12.21.03 (7:19 am) [edit] |
[b]The neo-con Bush family & associates and their corrupt corporate cronies are heinously profiteering from their insane, illegal & immoral incursions into Afghanistan & Iraq.[/b]
Winston Churchill described war-profiteering as a crime and confiscated the ill-gotten blood-money plundered & looted by those who propped themselves up from the death and misery of others. Harry Truman called it treason ...
"We the People" are gathering forces and ask that you too contact Congress http://www.congress.org and demand an investigation into the anti-christian war-profiteering by the corrupt neo-fascist Bush regime. Insist that the immoral & blood-thirsty profits swindled from the U.S. Treasury, Afghanistan & Iraq, from their bloody & miserable war-mongerings, by the sordid Bushies, their squalid [i]corporate-take-all [/i]cronies & their greedy wealthy campaign contributors, be confiscated.
[b]Take action: Stop war profiteering[/b]
"In November, Republican House negotiators blocked a provision that would have created criminal penalties for war profiteers and cheats who try to defraud American taxpayers and cash in on the relief and reconstruction efforts in Iraq," says Working Asset's latest online activism campaign. http://www.workingforchange.c... "The provision has now been introduced as a stand-alone bill and should be passed as soon as possible."
[b]Sources[/b]:
AlterNet on http://www.alternet.org
"End War Profiteering in Iraq" on http://www.workingforchange.c...
|
|
|
| |
| WANTED: A Real Economic Program - Instead of Mad King George's Swindle of America |
| 12.20.03 (8:29 am) [edit] |
[b]WANTED: A Real Economic Program
Instead of the Mad King George's Swindle of America[/b]
The Mad King George mistakenly thinks that America is his neo-imperial kingdom ... Maybe Condi Rice should turn-off the TV-set ... ah, no, Dubya & Condi watch football games & old movies-- not the news or anything of substance affecting our nation ... ([i]as they let 9/11 happen under their noses & have bungled their insane neo-con war-mongerings turned guerrilla quagmires in Afghanistan & Iraq ... they have criminally lied, deceived & propagated outright falsehoods ... they are responsible for the massacre of tens of thousands of innocent human beings ... in their pre-occupation with football games and plundering & looting the U.S. Treasury[/i]) ... and remind her playmate Dubya-- that this is the[i] Republic For Which It Stands[/i] as enshrined in our U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights. It is not Dubya's ... the "[i]boy in the plastic bubble's[/i]" empire or kingdom or playground ... to reek havoc at his neo-fascist whim ...
"We the People" are facing an enormous financial burden as our nation has been ruthlessly & recklessly raped economically in order to enrich the sordid Bush family, their corrupt corporate cronies & their squalid campaign contributors. [Refer to "[i]U.S. Homelessness & Poverty Worsens Under The Rapacious Bush Regime[/i]" on http://www.tblog.com/template... ]
[b]Wanted: A Real Economic Program[/b] on http://www.americanprogress.o...%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A52 1-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/031219.HTM#4
[b]Despite all the talk from the Administration that the economy is booming, severe problems are still plaguing America[/b]. The economy has lost 2.9 private sector jobs since President Bush took office. [i]Poverty has increased two years in a row [/i] http://www.epinet.org/content... http://www.americanprogress.o...%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A52 1-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/031219.HTM#4 , the first time that has happened in at least a decade. Twenty-five major American cities saw a [i]19% increase [/i] http://www.guardian.co.uk/use...,13918,1076608,00.html in demand for emergency food for the hungry. Health care costs are skyrocketing, with a [i]new study[/i] http://www.usatoday.com/money... showing more and more employers forcing workers to pick up the tab. And a[i] new study[/i] http://www.usmayors.org/uscm/... by the U.S. Conference of Mayors shows "[i]Hunger and homelessness [/i] http://www.reuters.com/newsAr... [i]both increased this year[/i] in U.S. cities to the point that social services agencies were often unable to meet emergency demands for food and shelter." In other words, while the President says "[i]things look pretty good[/i]" http://www.whitehouse.gov/new... for the economy – for millions of hard-working Americans, things still look pretty lousy.
[i][b]CUTTING OFF THE JOBLESS[/b][/i]: [i][b]AP[/b][/i] http://story.news.yahoo.com/n... reports, "Labor unions are trying to pressure President Bush and the GOP-controlled Congress to approve a new extension of federal unemployment benefits. The program expires Saturday because Congress adjourned for the year without extending the benefits. An average 90,000 jobless workers each week who exhaust their state benefits after Saturday won't get the extra 13 weeks of federal aid that others have received since March 2002, when Congress first approved the help." As the Center [i]on Budget and Policy Priorities[/i] http://www.cbpp.org/12-5-03ui... notes, "By the end of January, roughly half a million people who would have been eligible for the program will not be receiving federal help" because of the Administration and Congress's refusal to act.
[i][b]A LOOK AT THE CHOICES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE[/b][/i]: In the last three years, the White House has chosen [i]tax cuts for the highest-income Americans[/i], http://www.ctj.org/pdf/sen052... new laws that allow companies to avoid having to pay workers [i]overtime[/i], http://www.cbsnews.com/storie... a termination of [i]unemployment benefits[/i], http://www.usatoday.com/money... http://www.americanprogress.o...%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A52 1-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/031219.HTM#4 and the loosening of laws that [i]protect worker pensions[/i]. http://www.freep.com/money/bu... And now, to make matters worse, the [i]WSJ[/i] reports the Administration is "[i]eyeing cuts in federal grants to states[/i]" http://users2.wsj.com/WebInte...%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2F0%2C%2CSB 107179959074160700%2C00.html%3Fmod%3Dpolitics_sec ondary_stories_hs – money that is used for, among other things, social services that help people through tough economic times. Get American Progress fellow Gene Sperling's Point/Counterpoint on the Administration's economic and fiscal policies [i]HERE[/i] http://www.americanprogress.o... .
[i][b]A PRESCRIPTION FOR IMPROVEMENT[/b][/i]: Guest columnist [i]Jeffrey Wenger of the University of Georgia[/i] writes "easy answer [for the economy] http://www.americanprogress.o... would be to spend more money in making sure that workers who could not find jobs would have a means of income support ... Unemployment benefits could be extended by Congressional action, as was the case in this recession and recovery, or by setting better triggers for longer unemployment benefits, which extend benefits automatically, when the labor market is weak." Additionally, firms could be given "incentives to increase hiring sooner." Such measures "could include tax credits for hiring or a short-term suspension of payroll taxes. In particular, a tax credit for creating more good-paying part-time jobs would lead many men and women with high skills back into the labor force."
|
|
|
| |
| U.S. Homelessness & Poverty Worsens Under The Rapacious Bush Regime |
| 12.20.03 (7:28 am) [edit] |
[b]The so-called [i]'economic recovery' [/i]is another neo-con, neo-orwellian [i]"smoke-and-mirrors" [/i]swindle propagated by the corrupt neo-fascist Bush regime in order to persuade the American public that all is well in the good ole' USA-- when instead, all is far, far, far from well in this richest nation on earth:--[/b] Uh-huh, yeah, right ... Richest for a few plutocrats ... while the rest of us serve as neo-serfs in their greedy neo-imperial empire.
The rapacious Bush regime has played Santa Dubya to their corporate campaign contributors, corporations, wealthy plutocrats & the richest 5% top-dogs & fat-cats-- all awarded anti-christian, immoral [i](& possibly illegal[/i]) boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts-- resulting in a $560 Billion Deficit in 2003 ([i]$1.9 Trillion for Dubya's corrupt term in office from 2001-2004[/i]) ... while the rest of us are bearing the heart-breaking brunt of insane [i]corporate-take-all [/i]warfare based upon lies ([i]the rich & spoiled brats aren't going to Afghanistan or Iraq[/i]) ... and the back-breaking burden of Bush's plundering & looting of the U.S. Treasury.
The American Middle-Class are the back-bone of this nation-- and are being impoverished, as the working people will be paying off Dubya's historical record-level debts ... dying in his wars ... and, bearing the burdens of inflation, as the U.S. Dollar Shrinks-- State & Local Taxes Increase To Make-up For Dubya's "Welfare-for-the-Rich" Giveaways-- and, badly needed Services for Us All to Live in a Civilized Society are Slashed. Meanwhile Corporate Executive Pay-Packets Are Skyrocketing ([i]corporate rapists make over 500-800 times their workers-- and they sure as hell 'ain't' worth it ...) [/i]as Workers Incomes, Rights & Benefits Are Under-Mined & Destroyed To Re-Direct Profits into the Corrupt CEO Golden-Platinum Embezzlement Pay Packages!
Ah, but the Sordid Bush Family will [i]Rake In [/i]close to $1 Billion from their Afghanistan-Iraq War-Profiteering ... As The Gap Between the Haves-and-Have-Nots is Higher than at Any Times Since the Great Depression ... And, The Rich Are Getting Richer!!! ... Moreover, the Growth in GDP ([i]Gross Domestic Product[/i]) Is Funnelled into the Bulging Pockets of the Squalid Bushies and Their Dishonest & Greedy Corporate Executives, Top-Dogs & Fat-Cats ... [b]Consider that[/b]:
* [b]Between 9-15 million citizens are unemployed and looking for work [/b]([i]Dubya destroyed over 3 million jobs-- while Clinton created 22 million jobs [/i]...) ...
* [b]Over 15 million families live below the poverty line [/b]([i]1960s defined ... it is much, much worse[/i]) ... and [b]3.5 million citizens are homeless [/b]...
* [b]Between 45-85 million citizens lack health care coverage [/b]and are unable to be treated if they fall ill-- Dubya's corporate rapists ([i]HMOs, Pharmaceuticals, Insurance corporations & other private groups[/i]) are gobbling & swilling profits and making families ill, destitute and in pernicious debt their entire life ... so that these goons & thugs can live like neo-emperors.
The situation in this nation is dire, and the corrupt [i]corporate-take-all [/i]Bushies are worsening the lot of the citizens of this nation-- while they abuse their power to amasse great power & riches, in their neo-fascist quest to transform the U.S.A. into a neo-feudal slave state to serve their Global Corporate Empire.
[b]"We the People" are being ruthlessly swindled in a redistribution of wealth from working people to the top 5% income brackets -- a theft in this "train-wreck" of an economy that these fraudsters in the Bush regime have engineered in order to enrich themselves and improverish the rest of us.[/b]
One example cited today is "[i][b]Homelessness, hunger worsen, mayors' report finds: Emergency needs for food, shelter rise for families[/b][/i]" on http://www.boston.com/news/na... :
[b]WASHINGTON[/b] -- The US Conference of Mayors painted a dismal picture yesterday of growing homelessness and hunger among low-income, working families and reported a dramatic decrease in 2003 in the ability of most of the nation's 25 major cities to meet these basic needs.
"This survey underscores the impact the economy has had on everyday Americans," said conference president James A. Garner, the mayor of Hempstead, N.Y. Garner said a recovering economy will not immediately solve state and local budget shortfalls or reverse cutbacks in social-service programs. "We don't expect it to get any better next year."
The conference's annual survey found that in nearly all the cities, requests for emergency food assistance have increased by an average of 17 percent over last year, and the demand for emergency shelter rose by an average of 13 percent.
More than half of the cities surveyed reported that emergency food assistance facilities had to either turn people away or limit the groceries families could receive on each visit. Of those requesting food help, 59 percent were families and 39 percent were employed, the report said.
In 84 percent of the cities surveyed, shelters reported turning away homeless families because of too few beds and other resources. Officials estimated that 30 percent of requests for shelter by homeless people, and 33 percent of the requests by homeless families were unmet, according to the Conference of Mayors report.
Philip Mangano, an advocate for the homeless in Boston before he became the Bush administration's point person on the issue last year, said the pattern of growing needs, reported year after year by the Conference of Mayors, shows the "insanity" of traditional strategies for temporarily sheltering the homeless. He called for a new approach based on permanent housing and directed social services.
"We are all tired of homelessness, and no more so than the homeless people themselves," Mangano said at a news conference yesterday, vowing to "end this national disgrace."
Mangano is the chief spokesman for a 10-year administration plan to attack chronic homelessness by focusing resources and services on the most vulnerable and costly population -- the disabled, mentally ill, and substance abusers -- and using results-driven techniques to end homelessness, not just manage it.
At its annual meeting last summer, the Conference of Mayors endorsed the 10-year plan, and more than 60 cities and counties are now in stages of developing their own blueprints to bring public agencies, private foundations, faith-based and secular groups into partnerships to aid the chronically homeless, Mangano said.
Last week, Mayor Thomas M. Menino announced he is establishing a cabinet-level task force to start that process in Boston. In Atlanta, where the 10-year plan was launched last year, private foundations have pledged $6.2 million to the city initiative, Mangano said.
"Groups that were at the table 20 years ago left because they didn't see results-oriented solutions," Mangano said. "Now businesses, corporations, and foundations are coming back because they see there is a specific intention to end chronic homelessness."
In November, Governor Mitt Romney joined 39 other governors when he created an interagency council of top officials charged with redirecting state policies on homelessness. It is being chaired by Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey and follows a report from an executive commission that recommended moving from a system of sheltering the homeless to finding them transitional housing and support services that would prevent homelessness in the first place.
When visible on the streets, homelessness can be a political nightmare for local officials. The Bush administration reactivated the dormant Interagency Council on Homelessness because there was no coordination of the millions of federal dollars for mental health services, substance abuse prevention, job training, and prison release programs that are aimed at the homeless population but have not reduced it. The administration provided $35 million in new homeless grants to 11 cities this summer, and President Bush requested $70 million in his 2004 budget.
Advocates for the homeless credit Mangano, the executive director of the council, with bringing visibility to the issue and using business models to engage GOP lawmakers and conservative foundations in long-range problem-solving. "Without question, Philip is getting the conversation going and bringing in some nontraditional groups," said Joe Finn, executive director of the Massachusetts Shelter and Housing Alliance, the job Mangano once held in Boston.
In the annual one-night census of Boston's homeless, conducted earlier this month, city officials reported that the population of more than 6,000 had fallen 1.1 percent from last year. Menino said that could reflect a decrease in the number of shelter beds and stricter requirements on homeless families seeking emergency accommodations in hotels and motels. "Where are the hidden homeless?" he asked.
The Conference of Mayors reported an 8.3 percent increase in requests by families for emergency shelter in Boston in 2003, compared to a 19 percent increase in Washington, D.C., a 30 percent increase in Denver, and a 109 percent increase in Louisville, Ky.
The mayors' report noted a 24 percent increase in Boston in emergency food demands by families, with a 5 percent increase in unmet needs for groceries.
Ellen Parker, executive director of Project Bread in Boston, said the statistics suggest that the working poor can't make ends meet. "The economy is getting better, but I don't think things are getting better for poor people," she said.
[i]Mary Leonard can be reached at mleonard@globe.com[/i].
[b]Another insightful source[/b]:
"The Uncompassionate Conservative" by Molly Ivins on http://www.motherjones.com/ne... - [i]Excerpts[/i] -
"Jim Hightower's great line about Bush, "Born on third and thinks he hit a triple," is still painfully true. Bush has simply never acknowledged that not only was he born with a silver spoon in his mouth -- he's been eating off it ever since. The reason there is no noblesse oblige about Dubya is because he doesn't admit to himself or anyone else that he owes his entire life to being named George W. Bush. He didn't just get a head start by being his father's son -- it remained the single most salient fact about him for most of his life. He got into Andover as a legacy. He got into Yale as a legacy. He got into Harvard Business School as a courtesy (he was turned down by the University of Texas Law School). He got into the Texas Air National Guard -- and sat out Vietnam -- through Daddy's influence. (I would like to point out that that particular unit of FANGers, as regular Air Force referred to the "Fucking Air National Guard," included not only the sons of Governor John Connally and Senator Lloyd Bentsen, but some actual black members as well -- they just happened to play football for the Dallas Cowboys.) Bush was set up in the oil business by friends of his father. He went broke and was bailed out by friends of his father. He went broke again and was bailed out again by friends of his father; he went broke yet again and was bailed out by some fellow Yalies.
... Okay, we cut taxes for the rich and so we have to cut services for the poor. Presumably there is some right-wing justification along the lines that helping poor people just makes them more dependent or something. If there were a rationale Bush could express, it would be one thing, but to watch him not see, not make the connection, is another thing entirely. Welfare, Medicare, Social Security, food stamps -- horrors, they breed dependency. Whereas inheriting millions of dollars and having your whole life handed to you on a platter is good for the grit in your immortal soul? What we're dealing with here is a man in such serious denial it would be pathetic if it weren't damaging so many lives.
Bush's lies now fill volumes. He lied us into two hideously unfair tax cuts; he lied us into an unnecessary war with disastrous consequences; he lied us into the Patriot Act, eviscerating our freedoms. But when it comes to dealing with those less privileged, Bush's real problem is not deception, but self-deception."
|
|
|
| |
| Dubya's Handbook For Alienating Your Friends, At Home & Abroad |
| 12.19.03 (5:00 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" are saddled with the neo-con Mad King George who does not comprehend that he lives in a republic and not his own kingdom [/b]... The U.S. Federal Court has rebuked Dubya-- reminding him that he cannot treat citizens like chattel, and dole out sentences at his whim ([i]U.S. citizens have freedoms & rights-- these are not favors granted to us by "His Royal Highness[/i] [sic] [i]Bushy-boy"[/i]!) ... It is time for all citizens to remind this neo-fascist cabal of thugs & goons who have hijacked our government that they are accountable to [i][b]us[/b][/i], in accordance with the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights ... It is [i]OUR[/i] nation ... not[i] THEIR [/i]kingdom to swindle, plunder & loot, and [i]run into the ground [/i]in order to enrich themselves & their [i]corporate-take-all[/i] cronies ...
Consider "[i][b]Baffling week for Bush watchers - How to alienate your friends, at home and abroad[/b][/i]" on http://www.torontostar.com/NA...
[b]Puzzling actions leave even neo-con backers wondering:--[/b]
[i][b]Here's how you make friends in George W. Bush's world[/b][/i].
You bar countries from sharing in some $18.6 billion (U.S.) in Iraqi reconstruction contracts, then later the same day, you pick up the phone and ask the leaders of those very countries to be nice to your personal envoy, James Baker, when he comes calling this week asking you to forgive the money Iraq owes you.
[i][b]Here's how you welcome your northern neighbour's new prime minister[/b][/i].
You let your official spokesperson say how much you look forward to working with Paul Martin, then you make sure Canada is similarly shut out of reconstruction contracts, ignoring the financial help from Ottawa and the deaths of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan fighting your war on terrorism.
[i][b]Here's how you keep Europe guessing[/b][/i].
You send your defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to meet with the counterparts he once dismissed as "old Europe" and have him extend an olive branch, leading to widespread speculation that the U.S.-Europe rift is on the mend.
Then, you yank on the stitches by poking fun at German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's suggestion that your reconstruction policy could violate international law by glibly saying, as Bush did Friday: "International law? I better call my lawyer; he didn't bring that up to me."
[i][b]And here's how to alienate your neo-con base[/b][/i].
You make a major speech on the quest for democracy in the Middle East, calling it your Number 1 priority and saying your work must be continued by successive presidents for decades to come.
Then, a couple of weeks later, when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao comes calling, you make him happy by telling Taiwan it cannot hold a democratic referendum.
Put it all together and your list of detractors includes United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan; governments in France, Germany, Russia and Canada; commentators on the left and right; and your own party's senior congressional leadership.
Even factoring in Bush's go-it-alone, with-us-or-against-us style, last week's developments caused no end of puzzlement.
"It simply looks like the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing," says Doug Bandow, a senior analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute.
"This is the most bizarre juxtaposition of events I've ever seen. It frankly makes the administration look stupid."
The White House was said to be miffed that the Iraqi reconstruction memo by Deputy Defence Secretary Paul Wolfowitz was released on the eve of Baker's mission, but it signed off on the memo and Bush vigorously defended the policy a day later, saying those countries that risk their soldiers' lives deserve exclusive access to the reconstruction spoils.
His statement ignored the fact that more than half of the 63 Pentagon-approved countries did not have troops on the ground in Iraq.
Baker leaves tomorrow for five days of high-stakes diplomacy, meeting face-to-face with French President Jacques Chirac, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Schroeder.
He also will meet with two staunch allies of Washington: Britain's Tony Blair and Italy's Silvio Berlusconi.
Iraq owes an estimated $125 billion (U.S.), much of it due to France, Russia and Germany.
Putin has already signalled that he will point to the Iraqi reconstruction policy, thank Baker for his visit, then send him on his way with no debt forgiveness.
The Bush administration also drew fire for what some saw as a thinly veiled blackmail attempt, suggesting countries that forgive Iraqi debts could be put on the list of those approved for bidding on the 26 contracts. And the White House used some highly inflammatory language, suggesting that countries not part of the coalition had to be barred from contracts for reasons of U.S. security.
"This excludes countries like Canada, a leading contributor to peacekeeping operations, prominent champion of human rights and one of the world's most generous aid donors," wrote Gayle Smith of the Centre for American Progress, a liberal think-tank.
"Does the Bush administration truly believe that the `essential security interests of the United States' would be harmed if a Canadian company rebuilt the road from Baghdad to Tikrit?"
Finally, Bush had to put out a fire at home after a Pentagon investigation found that a subsidiary of the Halliburton Company, once headed by Vice-President Dick Cheney, had overcharged the government by as much as $61 million for fuel delivery to Iraq, a contract it was awarded without competition.
Bush tried to move quickly to douse the perception that the policy was now shielding a politically connected company.
"If anybody is overcharging the government, we expect them to repay that money," he said.
Bill Frist, the Republican leader in the Senate, was the highest-profile member of Bush's party to distance himself from the reconstruction policy and his comments stunned many observers.
"We have to remember that many of these countries that are being denied these contracts are supporting us elsewhere in the world, maybe fighting HIV-AIDS in Africa, maybe in Afghanistan," Frist said on CNBC.
"That's why I hope that there will be some moderation of this policy as we go forward."
Some of the toughest criticism came from the Project for the New American Century, a neo-conservative think-tank which sprang from an informal group that included Wolfowitz, author of the controversial Pentagon reconstruction memo, and Richard Perle, former assistant defence secretary.
"President Bush, we suspect, is going to overrule the Pentagon's attempt to exclude from the bidding for Iraq reconstruction contracts certain countries that have opposed U.S. policy in Iraq," wrote think-tank analysts William Kristol and Robert Kagan.
"He might as well do it sooner rather than later, so as to minimize the diplomatic damage done by the Pentagon's heavy-handed and counterproductive action."
They said a more clever administration would have had an open bidding process and then, if only companies from supportive countries received contracts, the message would have been delivered, albeit subtly.
"Instead of being smart, clever or magnanimous, the Bush administration has done a dumb thing," Kristol and Kagan wrote.
All of this overshadowed a major shift on China earlier in the week, one that was hailed as a major victory in China but a sell-out to a dictator by commentators at home.
Faced with the democratic aspirations to independence of Taiwan's Chen Shui-bian and the bellicose threats of Wen, Bush sided with the latter.
This angered not only the pro-Taiwan members of Congress but also a portion of the political spectrum that had acted as Bush's main cheerleader when he turned his Iraqi mission into a self-styled campaign for democracy and freedom.
"I see some very profound changes," said John Tkacik of the right-wing Heritage Foundation, "especially when the president of the United States (earlier) proclaimed that the global expansion of democracy was a pillar of American foreign policy.
"Then, he gets up and basically says the president of Taiwan, by unilaterally taking these moves toward a referendum, was provocative."
Madeline Albright, secretary of state under Bill Clinton, told an audience in Washington last week that Bush's dedication to democracy is superficial and viewed through one prism only.
"President Bush bangs the freedom drum loudly but generally rates other leaders by where they stand on Iraq, not on their policies towards their own people," she said.
All this combined to paint a picture of an administration in disarray, riven by internal conflicts and taken aback by world reaction yet again.
That should be no surprise, says analyst Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies.
"Neo-cons are driven by beliefs and their actions are driven by neo-con principles.
"When you are driven by ideology, you are always taken aback by the reaction of real people living in the real world."
- [i]Tim Harper[/i]
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Bush Regime Operates In An Anti-Democratic Veil-of-Secrecy" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"U.S. Court Reminds The Mad King George That He Isn't King In The U.S.A." on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Corrupt Bush White House Covers-Up Their Sordid & Squalid Track-Record ..." on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Corrupt Bush White House Covers-Up Their Sordid & Squalid Track-Record ... |
| 12.19.03 (4:01 pm) [edit] |
[b]The corrupt neo-con Bush White House covers-up their sordid and squalid track-record of lies, deceptions & falsehoods ... [/b]
Benjamin Franklin did not believe that our [i]Republic for Which It Stands[/i] would survive, because he thought that America's citizens would ultimately become corrupted and only be satisfied to be ruled by tyrants & despots ... [b]Has his prediction come true for "We the People"? ... It does seem that the United States of America tragically now permits a corrupt neo-fascist cabal of thugs & goons who hijacked our government to perpetrate heinous crimes against the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights ...[/b]
Consider "[i][b]White House Covers Tracks by Removing Information[/b][/i]" on http://www.misleader.org/dail... :
In a high-tech cover-up, the Washington Post this morning reports the White House is actively scrubbing government websites clean of any of its own previous statements that have now proven to be untrue.1 Specifically, on April 23, 2003, the president sent his top international aid official on national television to reassure the public that the cost of war and reconstruction in Iraq would be modest. USAID Director Andrew Natsios, echoing other Administration officials, told Nightline that, "In terms of the American taxpayers contribution, [$1.7 billion] is it for the US. The American part of this will be $1.7 billion. We have no plans for any further-on funding for this."
The president has requested more than $166 billion in funding for the war and reconstruction efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan this year. But instead of admitting that he misled the nation about the cost of war, the president has allowed the State Department "to purge the comments by Natsios from the State Department's Web site. The transcript, and links to it, have vanished." (The link where the transcript existed until it caused embarrassment was http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/nig...).
When confronted with the dishonest whitewash, the administration decided to lie. A Bush spokesman said the administration was forced to remove the statements because, "there was going to be a cost" charged by ABC for keeping the transcript on the government's site. But as the Post notes, "other government Web sites, including the State and Defense departments, routinely post interview transcripts, even from 'Nightline,'" and according to ABC News, "there is no cost."
This story is not the first time the President has tried to hide critical information from the American public. For instance, the president opposed the creation of the independent 9/11 investigative commission2, and has refused to provide the commission with critical information4, even under threat of subpoena5. Similarly, after making substantial budget cuts, the president ordered the government to stop publishing its regular report detailing those cuts to states6. And when confronted with a continuing unemployment crisis, the president ordered the Department of Labor to stop publishing its regular mass layoff report.
It is also not the first time the administration has sought to revise history and public records when those records become incriminating. As the Post reports "After the insurrection in Iraq proved more stubborn than expected, the White House edited the original headline on its Web site of President Bush's May 1 speech, "President Bush Announces Combat Operations in Iraq Have Ended," to insert the word 'Major' before combat." And the "Justice Department recently redacted criticism of the department in a consultant's report that had been posted on its Web site."
[b]Sources[/b]:
1. "White House Web Scrubbing", Washington Post, 12/18/2003.
2. "Rice opposes public panel to probe 9/11", CNN, 05/22/2002.
3. "9/11 Families Criticize Slow Response to Commission Requests", FindLaw, 10/14/2003.
4. "9/11 Commission Could Subpoena Oval Office Files", New York Times, 10/26/2003.
5. "Seek and Ye Shall Not Find", Washington Post, 03/11/2003.
6. "Shooting the messenger: Report on layoffs killed", Freedom of Information Center, 01/03/2003.
|
|
|
| |
| So-Called "Evidence of a Link" Between 9/11 Hijacker & Saddam Hussein Was FAKED!!! |
| 12.19.03 (6:46 am) [edit] |
[b]Earlier this week the neo-con, neo-fascist [i]spin-meisters [/i]were propagating another one of their many, many lies, deceptions & falsehoods [/b]... The UK's Telegraph ([i]an extreme right-wing mouth-piece of neo-con imperialists & corporate rapists[/i]) regurgitated a piece of mendacity regarding a [i]so-called "memo" called "evidence" of a phony "link" [/i]between the 9/11 hijacker, Mohammed Atta & Saddam Hussein ... [Refer to "[i]Iraqi Agent Denies Meeting 9/11 Hijacker ... More Neo-Con Neo-Orwellian LIES[/i]!" on http://www.tblog.com/template... .]
It was clear to anyone with even an[i] iota of brain-matter[/i] that this "sexed-up" fabrication was a very, very convenient plastic prop ([i]e.g. like phony Dubya's inedible plastic stunt turkey that he stupidly plopped-down beside in his imbecilic Thanksgiving Day photo-op[/i] ...) devised by the neo-con "crazies" and their puppets on the Iraqi Governing Counsel (IGC) [i]willing to do anything (absolutely anything)[/i] to please their corrupt paymasters & pimps in the neo-fascist Bush regime.
[b]"We the People" are being bombarded with faked neo-orwellian fabrications designed to deceive the [i]brain-dead & sleepy-headed Americans [/i]whose attention will then be diverted away from the Bush regime's [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i]. Don't fall for the neo-hitlerian propaganda re-vomited by the neo-cons' buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters ([i]Beware of the unreliable neo-fascist mouth-pieces of the Bushies: including the Weekly Standard, World Net Daily, Rush Limbaugh, Charles Krauthammer, William Safire, Ann Coulter & other discredited liars and fraudsters [/i]...) ... It isn't worthy of a free people to be so easily led "[i]off the cliff[/i]" ...
The tactic of neo-con propaganda machine is to spread a lie in the hopes that enough people believe it ... and then to hope that the lie is not exposed in the future ... It won't work amongst conscientious people who value the truth.[/b]
In "[i][b]Dubious Link Between Atta and Saddam: A document tying the Iraqi leader with the 9/11 terrorist is probably fake. PLUS, how terror financiers manage to stay in business[/b][/i]" on http://msnbc.msn.com/id/37416... :
[b](MSNBC)[/b] Dec. 17 - A widely publicized Iraqi document that purports to show that September 11 hijacker Mohammed Atta visited Baghdad in the summer of 2001 is probably a fabrication that is contradicted by U.S. law-enforcement records showing Atta was staying at cheap motels and apartments in the United States when the trip presumably would have taken place, according to U.S. law enforcement officials and FBI documents.
The new document, supposedly written by the chief of the Iraqi intelligence service, was trumpeted by the Sunday Telegraph of London earlier this week in a front-page story that broke hours before the dramatic capture of Saddam Hussein. TERRORIST BEHIND SEPTEMBER 11 STRIKE WAS TRAINED BY SADDAM, ran the headline on the story written by Con Coughlin, a Telegraph correspondent and the author of the book "Saddam: The Secret Life."
Coughlin's account was picked up by newspapers around the world and was cited the next day by New York Times columnist William Safire. But U.S. officials and a leading Iraqi document expert tell NEWSWEEK that the document is most likely a forgery—part of a thriving new trade in dubious Iraqi documents that has cropped up in the wake of the collapse of Saddam's regime.
"It's a lucrative business," says Hassan Mneimneh, codirector of an Iraqi exile research group reviewing millions of captured Iraqi government documents. "There's an active document trade taking place … You have fraudulent documents that are being fabricated and sold" for hundreds of dollars a piece.
Mneimneh said he hadn't seen the Telegraph document that purports to place Atta in Baghdad. But he, along with senior U.S. law-enforcement and intelligence officials, said the claims of an Atta trip to Iraq in the months before the September 11 attacks were highly implausible—and contradicted by a wealth of information that has been collected about Atta's movements during the period he was plotting the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
The Telegraph story was apparently written with a political purpose: to bolster Bush administration claims of a connection between Al Qaeda and Saddam's regime. The paper described a "handwritten memo" that was supposedly sent to Saddam Hussein by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, chief of Iraqi intelligence at the time. It describes a three-day "work program" that Atta had undertaken in Baghdad under the tutelage of notorious Palestinian terrorist Abu Nidal, who lived in the Iraqi capital until his death under suspicious circumstances in August 2002.
"Mohammed Atta, an Egyptian national, came with Abu Ammer [who is unidentified] and we hosted him in Abu Nidal's house at Al-Dora under our direct supervision," the document states. "We arranged a work program for him for three days with a team dedicated to working with him ... He displayed extraordinary effort and showed a firm commitment to lead the team which will be responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy."
The document, which according to Coughlin was supplied by Iraq's interim government, doesn't say exactly when Atta was supposed to have actually flown to Baghdad. But the memo is dated July 1, 2001, and Coughlin himself places the trip as the summer of 2001.
The problem with this, say U.S. law enforcement officials, is that the FBI has compiled a highly detailed time line for Atta's movements throughout the spring and summer of 2001 based on a mountain of documentary evidence, including airline records, ATM withdrawals and hotel receipts. Those records show Atta crisscrossing the United States during this period—making only one overseas trip, an 11-day visit to Spain that didn't begin until six days after the date of the Iraqi memo.
One FBI document, labeled "Law Enforcement Sensitive," states that during the summer of 2001, Atta "conducted extensive travel" that included visits in Florida, Boston, New York, New Jersey and Las Vegas. Indeed, this and other FBI documents show that during the last few days in June—when the presumed Iraq trip would appear to have occurred—almost all of Atta's movements are accounted for: On June 27, 2001, Atta flew from Ft. Lauderdale, Fla., to Boston. On the morning of June 28, he traveled from Boston to San Francisco (flying first class) where he switched planes and landed in Las Vegas that afternoon at 2:41 p.m. That afternoon, he rented a Chevrolet Malibu from an Alamo rental-car office, set up an account at an Internet café called the Cyber Zone and checked into the EconoLodge motel on Las Vegas Boulevard, a cheap motel in a neighborhood of seedy strip joints that is located barely two blocks from the local FBI office.
The FBI records show Atta logged onto his Cyber Zone Internet account five times over the next two days and then checked out of the EconoLodge at 3:30 a.m. on the morning of July 1. He then returned his rental car and boarded a flight to Denver at 5:59 a.m., landing in Boston later that day. A week later, on July 7, Atta boarded a flight from Boston to Zurich—the first leg on his trip to Spain. He returned to the United States on July 19, 2001.
Much about Atta's movements is still unknown—and most likely will remain so. FBI officials believe, for example, that Atta flew to Las Vegas as part of a series of trips he took that summer to test security at U.S. airports in preparation for the September 11 attacks. But it is just a theory. The visit to Spain is believed to have been for a meeting with Ramzi bin al-Shibh, one of the planners of the September 11 attacks, who also was in Spain during the same time.
While all of Atta's movements cannot be accounted for, enough is known to make it "highly unlikely" that the September 11 ringleader could have flown off to Baghdad for a three-day work program with Iraqi intelligence, a FBI official told NEWSWEEK. For similar reasons, the bureau has long since discounted claims by Czech intelligence—and widely promoted by some Iraq hawks in the Bush administration—that Atta had flown to Prague to meet with an Iraqi intelligence agent around April 8, 2001.
FBI records show Atta and fellow hijacker Marwan Al-Shehhi checking out of the Diplomat Inn in Virginia Beach, Va., and writing a check for cash for $8,000 for a SunTrust account in that city on April 4, 2001. For the rest of that week, Atta's cell phone was used to make repeated calls to Florida. On April 11, Atta rented an apartment in Coral Springs, Fla. While acknowledging that a few days are unaccounted for, the FBI has found no evidence that Atta departed the country overseas during this period, an official said.
Mneimneh, the Iraqi document expert, says that there are other reasons to discount the handwritten memo touted by the Telegraph. The document includes another sensational second item: how Iraqi intelligence, helped by a "small team from the Al Qaeda organization," arranged for a shipment from Niger to reach Iraq by way of Libya and Syria. Although the shipment is unspecified, the reference to Niger was immediately suggestive of Bush administration assertions earlier this year that Iraq sought to import yellowcake uranium from that African nation—claims that also have been widely discredited as being based on other forged documents that apparently came from the Niger Embassy in Rome.
Mneimneh says the wording of the document makes him highly suspicious: Iraqi intelligence officials were notoriously conservative and rarely—if ever—put incriminating information in writing. The reference to the Iraqi intelligence working with a "small team from the Al Qaeda organization" is "too explicit," he says.
Ironically, even the Iraqi National Congress of Ahmed Chalabi, which has been vocal in claiming ties between Al Qaeda and Saddam's regime, was dismissive of the new Telegraph story. "The memo is clearly nonsense," an INC spokesman told NEWSWEEK.
Contacted by Newsweek, The Sunday Telegraph's Con Coughlin acknowledged that he could not prove the authenticity of the document. He said that while he got the memo about Mohammed Atta and Baghdad from a "senior" member of the Iraqi Governing Council who insisted it was "genuine," he and his newspaper had "no way of verifying it. It's our job as journalists to air these things and see what happens," he said.
[i][b]Holes in the Terror Financing Net[/b][/i]
What does it take to shut down a major terrorist finance network ? U.S., European and United Nations investigators acknowledge that despite decisions by the Bush administration and the United Nations to put out of business a Swiss-and-Bahamas-based Islamic financial network called Al-Taqwa ("Fear of God" in Arabic), the network's long-time chief, who is also the subject of U.S. and United Nations sanctions, still is fighting to keep some of his businesses open.
Youssef Nada, an elderly Egyptian financier who founded and ran the Al-Taqwa network from bases in southern Switzerland and northern Italy, was designated a terrorist financier by the Bush administration in November 2001. A U.S. Treasury official testified to Congress that Nada had provided financial assistance to Al Qaeda both before and after the 9/11 attacks. In 2002, the Treasury placed more than a dozen companies established by Nada and an Eritrean-born business associate named Ahmed Idris Nasreddin on the U.S. terrorist finance sanctions list.
But U.N. officials and some news organizations recently have reported that despite international and U.S. sanctions, Nada and Nasreddin have continued to operate companies and own businesses—including luxury hotels in Italy owned by Nasreddin. And NEWSWEEK has learned that authorities in the tiny alpine money haven of Liechtenstein have recently failed in efforts to seize control over the remnants of one of Nada's corporate vehicles.
In an apparent effort to keep part of his financial network alive, law-enforcement sources say, Nada successfully applied to Liechtenstein officials for permission to rename two of his companies based in the pocket principality, both of which were in the process of liquidation. Liechtenstein authorities subsequently launched an effort to oust Nada as liquidator of one of the companies, now called Waldenberg, and install a former senior Liechtenstein government official as the new liquidator. This would have given investigators control over what remains of the records of the company, which might have yielded valuable clues as to Nada's financial activities.
But European law-enforcement sources say that a judge in Liechtenstein recently rejected the government's proposals to install a new liquidator, leaving Nada in charge of the failed company—and its critical records. A recent U.N. report noted that even though U.N. sanctions say that officially designated terrorist financiers like Nada must not be allowed to travel internationally, Nada has traveled from his residence in a tiny enclave of Italian territory surrounded by the Swiss canton of Ticino to Liechtenstein on business. A Swiss government official said that due to relaxed travel controls around Europe, it is not practical for the Swiss government to enforce an international travel ban on Nada, who has repeatedly denied any connection to Al Qaeda or terrorism.
|
|
|
| |
| Dubya's Neo-Con WMD Con-Game ... The Phony Hunt For Non-Existant WMD Called Off! |
| 12.19.03 (4:36 am) [edit] |
[b]Dubya's neo-con WMD con-game [i]got 'em into [/i]Afghanistan & Iraq:-- and [i]that [/i]was the corrupt Bushies' blood-thirsty goal from the start ([i]even prior to 9/11[/i]) ... [/b]Osama bin '[i]Forgotten[/i]' Laden is still at large and it was his Al Qaida network that was responsible for attacks upon America on 9/11, not Saddam Hussein ... but, Iraq had OIL and could serve as a[i] mafioso-style type "example" [/i]to others around the world, whom the corrupt Bush regime also wants to ruthlessly exploit in order to grab their natural resources & enslave their population at slave labor wages ([i]as these greedy corporate-take-all robber-barons are also raping America's environment and impoverishing American workers-- all to reap obscene profits as they create a fearful & desperate population to serve their whims in their neo-feudal slave state: their Global Corporate Empire[/i]).
The corrupt Bush family & associates in the squalid Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta [/i]and their sordid corporate campaign contributors ([i]Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal, etc.) [/i]are raking in hundreds of billions of dollars-- swindled, plundered & looted from the U.S. Treasury, Afghanistan & Iraq, while hundreds of our boys & girls, and tens of thousands of innocent Afghanistanis & Iraqis are slaughtered, massacred & maimed for life in the Bushies' botched-up fiasco.
Having witnessed the U.N. Inspection team under the direction of Hans Blix demonized, character assassinated & coerced by the neo-cons-- after 2-3 weeks of inspections ([i]with only approx. 200 U.N. inspectors provided to conduct their search![/i]) the Bushies lied to the world and prepared for their "pre-emptive" ([i]i.e. neo-hitlerian[/i]) war ... Thus, the Bush regime only allowed the U.N. Inspection team 2-3 months ([i]during which time the U.S. was not in any danger[/i]), while their neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters [i]shouted-and-smirked [/i]that we were in imminent danger of attack by Saddam Hussein using these non-existant WMDs, and then they rushed into an immoral & illegal incursion into Iraq-- ([i]despite the objections of almost the entire world community[/i])-- Otherwise, we were told by the mendacious Bushies, that millions of us would be blown to smitherings with "mushroom clouds" rising from the fruited plains ... or biological or chemical weapons attacks.
David Kay ([i]who has ties to weapons & armaments manufacturers and is a neo-con lap-dog[/i]) is handsomely awarded over 1400 inspectors, close to $900 million, and over 8 months-- and finds zip, zero, nada ... [i]What was the rush-to-war for?[/i] Ah yes, to satisfy the neo-cons' lust for war for global hegemony, power & riches. Now, Dubya has grown bored with his own con-game & finally calls a halt to his phony search for non-existant WMDs ... ([i]The corrupt neo-fascist Bush cabal knew full well that the vast majority of Iraq's WMDs were destroyed in the 1990s U.N. Inspection process ... just as they knew that Osama bin Laden & Saddam Hussein were enemies ... just as they knew that attacks upon America prior to 9/11 would occur & did nothing to prevent them[/i] http://www.tblog.com/template... !)
[b]"We the People" were told bold-faced lies, deceptions & falsehoods ... and tens of thousands of people have tragically died to enrich the insane Bushies & their corporate pimps ... This horrific carnage, mayhem & massacre was unnecessary. [/b]Misleading a people into war based upon false pretexts is a crime under the U.S. Constitution. Please contact Congress on http://www.congress.org to demand that Dubya & his corrupt cabal be investigated and tried for [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i].
Consider "[i][b]Is the search for weapons over? After eight months with no discoveries, mission chief quits; Fewer than 40 of the 1,400 inspectors still in the field; As attacks on US military grow, WMD hunt no longer a priority[/b][/i]" on http://news.independent.co.uk... :
After eight months of fruitless search, George Bush has in effect washed his hands of the hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, in whose name the United States and Britain went to war last March.
David Kay, the CIA adviser who headed the US-led search for WMD, is to quit, before submitting his assessment to the US President in February.
The departure of Mr Kay, a strong believer in the case for toppling Saddam Hussein because of his alleged weapons, comes as a particular embarrassment to Tony Blair. This week he maintained that Mr Kay had uncovered "massive evidence" of a network of WMD laboratories.
For Mr Bush, the missing weapons are a politically charged issue. Pressed to explain why his administration had asserted Saddam possessed weapons, when at best fragmentary evidence of programmes had been found, Mr Bush replied: "So what's the difference? "If he were to acquire weapons, he would be the danger," he said in an interview with ABC News' Diane Sawyer.
Mr Bush's public dismissal of the weapons issue is the latest move by Washington and London to changethe justification for war. Weapons of mass destruction, and even weapons programmes, are no longer being put forward as the reason for the invasion.
Senior US and British officials now dwell almost exclusively on the atrocities perpetrated by Saddam against his people, and the opportunity provided by his removal for a regeneration of the Middle East.
Opinion polls point to the strategy working. The US public has forgotten what it was being told every day only nine months ago about the "imminent threat" the former Iraqi leader posed to the US, while the capture of Saddam last Saturday had boosted the President's approval ratings to a healthy 60 per cent-plus.
Mr Kay's departure as head of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) is said to be for family and personal reasons. He is not in Iraq at present but on holiday in Washington.
Mr Kay himself sounds increasingly doubtful that chemical or biological weapons will be found, and is said to be resentful that the US military was less than helpful to his experts, preferring to prioritise the counter-insurgency.
Publicly, Mr Kay insists, and points to his first interim report this autumn as proof, that the ISG has already unearthed evidence of ongoing weapons programmes. But he acknowledged on the BBC's Panorama programme three weeks ago he was prepared to be proved wrong that no weapons existed.
Downing Street played down reports of Mr Kay's departure as "rumour, not fact", and denied that Mr Blair had given up hope that evidence of WMD would be found. Privately, British ministers cling to the hope of finding evidence of weapons programmes rather than the actual chemical or biological weapons systems. They hope Saddam's capture will end the "climate of fear" among Iraqi scientists and enable them to be honest about his regime.
This week Mr Blair was accused by the Tories and Lib Dems of "spinning" the ISG's interim report after he said they had "found massive evidence of a huge system of clandestine laboratories, workings by scientists, plans to develop long range ballistic missiles".
The ISG, set up in June, has a nominal staff of 1,400 specialists, analysts and translators, all theoretically dedicated to the search for WMD. But the numbers in the field have been less: two teams of 20 at most. In October, the group's strength dwindled further when Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, ordered many personnel to be transferred to the regular forces to help counter the growing rebellion.
Despite the capture and interrogation of many senior Iraqi officials, there has been no breakthrough. Saddam is said to have told investigators what Iraq told the UN before the invasion: that it no longer had banned weapons.
But the seizure of Saddam has given some American officials new hope that banned materials will be found.
Peter Kilfoyle, a former Defence minister, said Saddam's capture had not relieved the pressure on Mr Blair for weapons to be tracked down.
The former deputy chief UN weapons inspector Charles Duelfer said: "What is important is Saddam's intentions. The case can be made that he may not have had existing weapons, but his intention was to outlast the inspectors and reconstruct his weapons capabilities."
|
|
|
| |
| Anal-Retentive Veep Cheney: Believe It, Or Not! |
| 12.18.03 (5:49 pm) [edit] |
[b]Anal-Retentive Veep Cheney: Believe It, Or Not![/b]
[i][b]Vice President Dick Cheney [/b][/i]yesterday granted a rare interview http://www.washingtonpost.com... to right-wing radio host Armstrong Williams. Cheney, who [i]Newsweek[/i] http://msnbc.msn.com/id/34035... notes discarded intelligence that didn't fit his ideological motives, lashed out at progressives and the media for pointing out his distortions and deceptions. He said "it drives me nuts [when] I see stories that are fundamentally inaccurate" and lamented that "people don't check the facts." However, President Bush made the "fundamentally inaccurate" claim that "Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" http://www.whitehouse.gov/new... – a claim the White House was forced to later rescind. USAID Director Andrew Natsios said on 4/23/03 that “the American part of [reconstruction] will be $1.7 billion - we have no plans for any further-on funding for Iraq." Just weeks later the Administration requested an additional $87 billion. And Cheney himself told Meet the Press, "We know that [Saddam] has a long-standing relationship with the al-Qaeda organization," a claim since refuted by U.S., U.N., and European intelligence reports. (For a rundown of these intelligence reports, see the Al Qaeda section of American Progress's "[i][b]Iraq: Claims vs. Facts[/b][/i]" report http://www.americanprogress.o...%7bE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A52 1-5D6FF2E06E03%7d/IRAQ-CL AIMVSFACT.PDF .)
[b]CHENEY SAYS NEED FOR SPEED MEANS INACCURACY[/b]: Cheney criticized http://www.washingtonpost.com... the press for its "emphasis now on getting there fast with a story that oftentimes accuracy goes out the window." But it was Cheney, who in the rush to war six days before invasion, told Meet the Press without proof that "Iraq has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." Cheney was in such a rush that, when confronted with a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency that directly contradicted him, he said simply "[IAEA Director] Elbaradei is, frankly, wrong." (Cheney was since forced to correct his statements).
[b]CHENEY DEFENDS HALLIBURTON[/b]: The WP http://www.washingtonpost.com... notes, "Cheney said many journalists have not tried to find out 'the real facts' when writing about Halliburton," the oil company Cheney was CEO of and from which [i][b]Cheney still receives deferred compensation[/b][/i] http://www.guardian.co.uk/Ira...,2763,912515,00.html . But recent reports show that [i][b]Halliburton has been overcharging the U.S. government [/b][/i] http://www.startribune.com/st... while[i][b] providing unsanitary food to U.S. soldiers[/b][/i] http://www.taipeitimes.com/Ne... . He said "our opponents have spent a lot of time trying to find some allegation that Halliburton got favoritism on contracts" – but then offered no answer as to why the oil company has received more than $2 billion in contracts without any bid competition http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/03121... .
[b]"We the People" are witness to the cynical & manipulative neo-orwellian double-speak perpetrated by a corrupt cabal of hypocritical thugs & goons in the Bush regime ... It is petty, mean, immoral, traitorous & despicable ...[/b]
[b]Source[/b]:
[i]The Center for American Progress [/i]on http://www.americanprogress.o...
|
|
|
| |
| U.S. Court Reminds The Mad King George That He Isn't King In The U.S.A. |
| 12.18.03 (5:06 pm) [edit] |
[b]Today, the U.S. Federal Appeals court courageously reminded the Mad King George and his arrogant cabal of neo-con neo-fascist thugs & goons that he indeed, [i]Is Not a King [/i]in the United States of America. [/b]
The Bush regime has forgotten ([i]or are too ignorant to comprehend [/i]...) that we live in the [b]Republic For Which [i]It [/i]Stands[/b] ... the '[i][b]It[/b][/i]' being a democratic system of government as enshrined in the[b] U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights [/b]... The hypocritical neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters who lust for warfare ([i]to enrich Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal, et al[/i].) [i]crow, scream & smirk [/i]about "[i]fighting for freedom[/i]" -- which is bunk ... the cowardly Bushies are getting others to fight their wars [i]for them [/i]& die [i]for them [/i]in order to empower & enrich the Bush family, Cheney family & their war-profiteers & greedy campaign contributors ... and, at the same time, these dangerously imbecilic neo-con criminals are attempting to unravel our freedoms here at home ([i]and by the way, they don't give a damn about "freedom" in Afghanistan & Iraq, either [/i]...) ...
[b]"We the People" are in danger [/b]... in fact, we are threatened by this corrupt neo-con Bush cabal that has no respect for our nation and no respect for our system of government. Today was one courageous decision by the U.S. Federal Appeals Court, but tragically we continue face real perils from within ... Please contact Congress http://www.congress.org to demand that an investigation into the crimes committed by the Bush regime be launched immediately.
"[b]How long overdue is this? [/b]Jose Padilla, the former Chicago gang member the Bush Administration declared an "enemy combatant" two summers ago, has been sitting in a Pentagon-controlled Navy brig in South Carolina -- never charged and never tried, denied a lawyer, denied even a phone call or a chance to talk to any friendly face. He was held like this at the pleasure of an [i]out-of-control [/i]President who argues with a straight face that he has the right to cage an American citizen forever on a whim. http://www.thenation.com/outr...
Today a federal appeals court ruling handed down in New York restated the obvious: the President is wrong. http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFr... He [Dubya] cannot simply clap his hands and order the "[i]disappearance[/i]" of a US citizen. http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFr... Which doesn't mean Padilla is free -- only that he is free to enter the mainstream criminal justice system, which has great experience with complex conspiracy cases, and will now tackle the question of whether Padilla truly was involved in planning terrorist activities. The ACLU, which filed its own brief http://archive.aclu.org/court... in [i]Jose Padilla v. Donald Rumsfeld[/i], calls today's "[i][b]a powerful and courageous decision[/b][/i]."" http://www.thenation.com/outr...
- Matt Biven in [i]The Nation [/i]on http://www.thenation.com/outr...
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Appeals court: Guantanamo prisoners should have access to lawyers, U.S. court system - Ruling is rebuke to Bush administration" on http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3...
"Appeals Court Says Bush Can't Hold U.S. Citizen" on http://www.reuters.com/newsAr...;jsessionid=R513X4KFXJLMS CRBAEKSFFA?type=topNews&s toryID=4016292
"Bush Regime Operates In An Anti-Democratic Veil-of-Secrecy" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Bush Regime Operates In An Anti-Democratic Veil-of-Secrecy |
| 12.16.03 (7:55 am) [edit] |
[b]The corrupt neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta [/i]have forgotten that they are simply [i]the servants[/i] of "[i]We the People[/i]" in Our Republic For Which [i]'It'[/i] Stands[/b] ... the [i]'It'[/i] is: [i]Our democratic system of government[/i] as enshrined in our U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights ... The Bush regime operates in an anti-democratic [i](& possibly illegal[/i]) veil-of-secrecy.
Transparency and open government, [i]accessible to the people[/i], is fundamental to ensuring the necessary accountabilities, checks-and-balances, and the responsibilities, that our leaders are obliged to respect, in accordance with [i]our laws [/i]and[i] our rights [/i]and [i]our freedoms [/i]... But, not the neo-con Bushies who [b]trample on [i]our laws [/i][/b]and [b]unravel [i]our rights [/i][/b]and [b]tread on [i]our freedoms[/i][/b].
Veep Cheney, for example, is withholding information regarding the [i]participants [/i]in his secret "U.S. Energy Policy" meetings held in collaboration with his corporate robber-barons, top-dogs & fat-cats ([i]it is purported that Kenny-boy (Enron) Lay amongst other big republican campaign contributors & swindlers were involved ...[/i]) ... There are laws to prohibit those with [i]conflicts-of-interest [/i]from defrauding the public, and Cheney may be in violation of the law-- which, one suspects is why he refuses to release the [i]participants[/i] of those secret "U.S. Energy Policy" meetings:-- Did Cheney give the [i]thumbs-up [/i]for the phony energy shortage staged to plunder & loot California & other American consumers out of billions of dollars in the summer of 2001? Did Cheney promise his corporate cronies a "[i]war in Iraq[/i]" ([i]prior to 9/11[/i]) as [i]pay-back [/i]for all of those hefty campaign contributions and other [i]big-bucks [/i]funneled his way? If so, Cheney could and should be tried for crimes in violation of his oath of office, prosecuted and go to jail ...
The U.S.A. is not ([i]as yet, although the Bushies are trying to turn us into an "Enron" that they can exploit for their own power & wealth ...[/i]) a corporation ([i]under our current inane laws that permit swindling & defrauding of investors ...[/i]) that serves the wealthy plutocracy-- Bush & Cheney don't [i]own[/i] this nation ([i]although they are trying to change that [/i]...) ... the Bushies are temporary ([i]thank god[/i]) public servants of all of the people, rich and poor ... nothing more, nothing less ...
"We the People" should demand that the Bush regime be held accountable for their [i]Crimes Against Humanity [/i]abroad, and their crimes against the [i]U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights [/i]here at home. [b]In the United States of America, no man, [i]not even the president[/i], is above the rule of law[/b]. Let us hope for our own nation's sake that [i]9/11 didn't change that[/i]! Write to Congress & Supreme Court on http://www.congress.org .
[b]Consider "[i]The untold story of the Bush administration's penchant for secrecy - How the public's business gets done out of the public[/i]"[/b] on http://www.usnews.com/usnews/... :
[i]Friday, Dec. 12, the PBS television program NOW with Bill Moyers will air a report on Bush administration secrecy produced in collaboration with U.S. News. Please visit pbs.org for stations and airtimes in your area. The U.S. News article, "Keeping Secrets," will be published in Monday's edition. Full text will be available on USNews.com Saturday, Dec. 13, at 6 p.m[/i].
The Bush administration has removed from the public domain millions of pages of information on health, safety, and environmental matters, lowering a shroud of secrecy over many critical operations of the federal government.
The administration's efforts to shield the actions of, and the information held by, the executive branch are far more extensive than has been previously documented. And they reach well beyond security issues.
A five-month investigation by [i]U.S. News [/i]details a series of initiatives by administration officials to effectively place large amounts of information out of the reach of ordinary citizens, including data on such issues as drinking-water quality and automotive tire safety. The magazine's inquiry is based on a detailed review of government reports and regulations, of federal agency Web sites, and of legislation pressed by the White House.
[i]U.S. News [/i]also analyzed information from public interest groups and others that monitor the administration's activities, and interviewed more than 100 people, including many familiar with the new secrecy initiatives. That information was supplemented by a review of materials provided in response to more than 200[i] Freedom of Information Act [/i]requests filed by the magazine seeking details of federal agencies' practices in providing public access to government information.
[i][b]Among the findings of the investigation[/b][/i]:
•Important business and consumer information is increasingly being withheld from the public. The Bush administration is denying access to auto and tire safety information, for instance, that manufacturers are required to provide under a new "early-warning system" created following the Ford-Firestone tire scandal four years ago. The[i] U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission[/i], meanwhile, is more frequently withholding information that would allow the public to scrutinize its product safety findings and product recall actions.
•New administrative initiatives have effectively placed off limits critical health and safety information potentially affecting millions of Americans. The information includes data on quality and vulnerability of drinking-water supplies, potential chemical hazards in communities, and safety of airline travel and others forms of transportation.
•Beyond the well-publicized cases involving terrorism suspects, the administration is aggressively pursuing secrecy claims in the federal courts in ways little understood--even by some in the legal system. The administration is increasingly invoking a "state secrets" privilege that allows government lawyers to request that civil and criminal cases be effectively closed by asserting that national security would be compromised if they proceed.
•New administration policies have thwarted the ability of Congress to exercise its constitutional authority to monitor the executive branch and, in some cases, even to obtain basic information about its actions.
There are no precise statistics on how much government information is rendered secret. One measure, though, can be seen in a tally of how many times officials classify records. In the first two years of Bush's term, his administration classified records some 44.5 million times, or about the same number as in President Clinton's last four years, according to the [i]Information Security Oversight Office[/i], an arm of the [i]National Archives and Records Administration[/i].
MEDIA CONTACT: Richard Folkers, Director of Media Relations(rfolkers@usnews .com or 202-955-2219)
[b]Other readings[/b]:
"U.S. Supreme Court will review lawsuit over secretive Cheney energy meetings" on http://www3.cjad.com/content/...
"Judicial Watch: SUPREME COURT AGREES TO HEAR CASE ON VICE PRESIDENT’S SECRET ENERGY TASK FORCE - Judicial Watch Will Argue Before the High Court For “Open Government” And That the Vice President is Not “Above the Law”" on http://www.judicialwatch.org/...
Judicial Watch Web-Site on http://www.judicialwatch.org/...
"Bush Administration Documents on Secrecy Policy" on http://www.fas.org/sgp/bush/i...
"Bush draws veil of secrecy around government's files" on http://foi.missouri.edu/homel...
"Cheney's secret: keeping tabs on the Bush administration.(WWatch)(Vice Dick President Cheney)(inflence of lobbyists on energy policy)(Brief Article)" on http://www.findarticles.com/c...
|
|
|
| |
| U.S. Occupation Authority Suppresses Study of Iraqi Civilian Casualties in Bush's War |
| 12.15.03 (4:27 pm) [edit] |
[b]The hypocritical Bush regime are condemning the tyrant Saddam Hussein's[i] crimes [/i]against the Iraqi people, while covering-up their own[i] crimes [/i]against the Iraqi people ... as the U.S. Occupation Authority suppresses any studies of Iraqi civilian casualties caused by Bush's war-turned-bloody-guerril la-quagmire[/b]. To-date it is reported that at least 21,000-55,000 Iraqi civilians have been massacred in Bush's war upon Iraq http://www.theage.com.au/arti... ... and no WMDs were found ... and no WMDs posed an imminent threat to our National Security (Dubya's [i]casus belli [/i]to invade Iraq) ... instead, it is becoming[i] clearer and clearer with each passing day [/i]that the real motives behind the Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta's [/i]immoral & illegal incursion into Iraq were instead, to empower and enrich themselves & their corporate cronies: [i]Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal, et al[/i].
"We the People" must refuse to be collaborators in the neo-con's [i]Crimes Against Humanity [/i]... and should demand that Congress http://www.congress.org call for hearings into the impeachment of Bush and a full accounting of the atrocities committed against the Afghanistani and Iraqi peoples, [i]in our names[/i], based upon lies, deceptions & falsehoods.
Today's report "[i][b]US occupation authority suppresses study of Iraqi civilian casualties[/b][/i]" by Peter Symonds on http://www.wsws.org/articles/... :
In a crude effort to cover up the extent of its crimes in Iraq, the US occupation authority has brought pressure to bear on the country’s health ministry officials to halt a count of civilians killed and injured during the US-led invasion in March and subsequently.
Head of the ministry’s statistics department Dr Nagham Mohsen told the media last Wednesday that she had been summoned by the director of planning Dr Nazar Shabandar last month and told to stop a survey of hospitals aimed at tallying civilian casualties. He had also ordered her not to release any of the partial information that had been collected to date.
Mohsen said Shabandar had been acting on behalf of Health Minister Dr Khodeir Abbas—a member of US-imposed puppet administration, the Iraqi Governing Council. “We stopped the collection of this information because our minister didn’t agree with it,” she said. “The CPA [the US-led Coalition Provisional Authority] doesn’t want this to be done.”
Abbas is out of the country at a conference in Egypt but, at the prompting of the CPA, issued a statement denying he or US occupation authorities had anything to do with the order. “I have no knowledge of a civilian war casualty survey even being started by the Ministry of Health, much less stopping it,” he stated, adding: “The CPA did not direct me to stop any such survey.”
Abbas’ comments are simply not credible. The ministry began its survey in July by sending out letters to all hospitals and clinics in Iraq, asking them to send details of civilians killed or wounded in the war. The study was reported in the media as early as August and a preliminary figure of 1,764 deaths has been made public. A final report was being anticipated by the media and human rights organisations. Significantly neither Abbas nor the CPA has moved to reinstate the study.
From the outset, the Pentagon has refused to keep its own tally of Iraqi casualties. US military spokesmen have contemptuously dismissed news of civilian deaths and injuries as the unfortunate but inevitable consequence of war, insisting that American and allied troops have avoided targetting civilians. But reports from a variety of sources tell a different story: that thousands of civilians have been killed, many of them through indiscriminate air strikes and the extensive use of cluster bombs.
A Los Angeles Times survey of 27 Baghdad hospitals found that at least 1,700 civilians died in the Iraqi capital alone in the five weeks from March 20, when the US invasion was launched. A more comprehensive tally by Associated Press based on information from about half of Iraq’s hospitals put the civilian death toll at 3,240 for the month following March 20.
In late October, the Project on Defence Alternatives, a US thinktank, published a report based on hospital records, official US military statistics and news reports. It estimated that between March 20 and May 1, when Bush declared the end of major combat operations, between 3,200 and 4,300 non-combatant civilians were killed in the fighting.
The Iraq Body Count, which estimates the number of civilian deaths based on a careful correlation of media reports, puts the figure far higher. Between March 20 and May 1, between 5,708 and 7,356 Iraqi civilians were killed and the number has continued to climb. The latest figures listed on its website [www.iraqbodycount.net] put the death toll at between 7,935 and 9,766.
A report released last week by the US-based Human Rights Watch (HRW) pointed out that even hospital figures would not tell the full story. “Though hospitals have records of some of the deaths in the war, a certain percentage of casualties, due to religious practices, were not taken to hospitals, not even to obtain death certificates. Finally, as in any war, in some instances, there were few if any remains by which to identify the dead.”
HRW found that the methods of the US military and its allies had directly contributed to the high death toll. “The widespread use of cluster munitions, especially by US and UK ground forces caused at least hundreds of civilian casualties... Although cluster munition strikes are particularly dangerous in populated areas, US and UK ground forces repeatedly used these weapons in attacks on Iraqi positions in residential neighbourhoods.” The use of more than 12,000 cluster munitions resulted in the dispersal of at least 1.9 million deadly bomblets, many of which remained unexploded, including in residential areas.
The report also criticised the Pentagon for the indiscriminate use of air strikes. “Many of the civilian casualties from the air war occurred during US attacks targetting senior Iraqi leaders. The United States used unsound targetting methodology that relied on intercepts of satellite phones and inadequate corroborating intelligence.” Satellite phone signals can only provide bombing coordinates to an accuracy of 100 metres. Based on such inaccurate information, an airstrike in a built up urban environment would put hundreds, if not thousands, of innocent people at risk.
“This flawed targetting strategy was compounded by a lack of effective assessment both prior to the attacks of the potential risks to civilians and after the attacks of their success and utility. All of the fifty acknowledged attacks targetting Iraqi leadership failed. While they did not kill a single targetted individual, the strikes killed and injured dozens of civilians. Iraqis who spoke to Human Rights Watch about the attacks it investigated repeatedly stated that they believed the intended targets were not even present at the time of the strikes,” HRW stated.
These reports and estimated casualty figures are just a pale reflection of the human misery that has been caused by the Bush administration’s illegal occupation of Iraq. It is obvious why the Pentagon and the Coalition Provisional Authority do not want a comprehensive survey of Iraqi hospitals to confirm just how many innocent Iraqi men, women and children have been killed and maimed by the American military.
In the first place, such a study would further fuel the growing opposition to the US-led occupation, both inside Iraq and internationally, including within the US itself. Secondly, it would provide additional evidence of the war crimes carried out by the US military in Iraq, for which the Bush administration is directly responsible.
As the HRW report cautiously noted, the Geneva Conventions not only bar direct attacks on civilians but also prohibit indiscriminate attacks. These include strikes against “military objectives and civilians or civilian objects without distinction” and those that are expected to cause civilian casualties “which would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated”.
The widespread use of cluster bombs in built-up residential areas and air strikes against ill-defined targets are another expression of the Pentagon’s callous indifference to the consequences of its actions for Iraqi civilians and its contempt for international law.
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Iraq war killed 21,000 to 55,000: report estimates" on http://www.theage.com.au/arti...
"US military kills six Afghan children in new atrocity" on http://www.wsws.org/articles/...
"Toll on U.S. troops in Iraq grows as wounded rolls approach 10,000" on http://www.centredaily.com/ml...
|
|
|
| |
| Anti-Saddam Resistance Fighters In Iraq Call on Supporters To Fight American Occupation |
| 12.15.03 (9:58 am) [edit] |
[b]The Bush regime was correct yesterday in warning Americans not to be optimistic ([i]that because Saddam Hussein was captured[/i]), that their insane massacres, carnages and slaughters will abate in their neo-con bloody wars-turned-guerrilla quagmires in Afghanistan and Iraq: ... Indeed, resistance fighters in both nations are calling for further uprisings to oppose [i](& oust[/i]) the American occupation of their countries ...[/b]
[i][b]Why are we still there?[/b][/i] The Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta [/i]called off their inane & costly search for WMDs (their [i]casus belli[/i] for invading Iraq) supposedly posing an imminent threat to our National Security ... now recognized by most intelligent Americans & citizens of the world, as a[i] bold-faced LIE[/i]-- told by the neo-cons to rush to war in order to enable their neo-fascist corporate cronies ([i]Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal, et al.[/i]) to enrich themselves by swindling, plundering & looting the [i]not-rich[/i] American taxpayers, Afghanistani & Iraqi peoples.
Even [i]Anti-Saddam-Hussein groups & forces[/i] are now rising-up and do not want the U.S.A. to[i] rape-and-ravage [/i]the Iraqi people & assets (OIL & Businesses), as the neo-fascist Bushies are doing to the American people and our nation. The precious lives of our men & women in the U.S. military and innocent civilians in Afghanistan & Iraq, should not be ruthlessly squandered to enrich the corrupt, greedy top-dogs & fat-cats [i]in-and-connected to [/i]the Bush regime.
In "[i][b]Saddam's Capture Will Not Stop The Relentless Killings From Insurgents[/b][/i]" by Robert Fisk, on the ground in Baghdad, who reports on http://www.informationclearin... : - [i]Excerpt[/i] -
... A sergeant in the 1st Armoured Division on checkpoint duty in Baghdad explained the situation to The Independent in remarkably blunt words. "We're not going to go home any sooner because of Saddam's getting caught," he said. "We all came to search for weapons of mass destruction and attention has now been diverted from that. The arrest of Saddam is meaningless. We still don't know why we came here."
There are groups aplenty with enthusiasm to attack the Americans but who never had any love for Saddam. One example is the Unification Front for the Liberation of Iraq, which was anti-Saddam but has now called on its supporters to fight the American occupation. In all, The Independent has identified 12 separate guerrilla groups, all loosely in touch with each other through tribal connections, but only one could be identified as comprising Saddam loyalists or Baathists.
... In many areas, men identifying themselves as resistors have openly boasted that they are joining the new American-paid police forces in order to earn money, gain experience with weapons and gather intelligence on their American military "allies". Exactly the same fate that befell the Israelis in Lebanon, where their proxy Lebanese South Lebanon Army militia started collaborating with their Hizbollah enemies, is now likely to encompass the Americans.
The same men who are going to carry on attacking the Americans will, of course, be making a secret holiday in their heart over the capture of Saddam. Why, they will argue, should they not rejoice at the end of their greatest oppressor while planning the humiliation of the occupying army which seized him?
[b]"We the People" should be asking our so-called [i]puppet[/i] president & [i]rubber-stamp [/i]Congress ([i]who have forgotten that they are servants of the people of the U.S.A[/i].) http://www.congress.org , why we still remain as occupiers in Iraq? ... Enriching the whorish Bush family and their [i]corporate-take-all [/i]pimps simply isn't a good enough reason![/b]
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"It's Not Over" on http://www.tompaine.com/featu...
"Saddam Gone" on http://www.thenation.com/capi...
"SADDAM HUSSEIN CAPTURED" on http://www.kpvi.com/index.cfm...
|
|
|
| |
| Bush/Cheney Inc.'s HALLIBURTON Serves DIRTY FOOD To Our U.S. Troops In Iraq |
| 12.14.03 (8:34 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" might mistakenly have dwelt under the mis-apprehension that we had heard, if not all, at least [i]most of the dirt [/i]... but the "[i]bottom of the barrel[/i]", of the Bush regime's corruptions, have as yet to be scraped out of all of their obscene dirt & scum ...[/b]
The neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta's [/i]HALLIBURTON is serving [i]DIRTY FOOD[/i] to our U.S. troops in Iraq ... The insane neo-con "crazies" see our U.S. service men and women as [i]'cannon-fodder'[/i] and treat them as[i] 'disposable-and-dispensab le'[/i]-- whatever the phony [i]lip-service [/i]the Bushies pay to cover-up their ugly behavior. So long as the whorish Bush family and their [i]corporate-take-all [/i]pimps retain power & amasse gluttonous profits, they do not give a damn about their immoral & illegal carnage, massacre, death, injury, maiming, misery and the suffering of others ...
Not only do the cowardly & arrogant neo-con Bushies & their corrupt corporate cronies continue to price-gouge, swindle, plunder & loot the American people-- these greedy, neo-fascist thugs & goons also treat our brave men and women in the U.S. Military, who are putting their lives at risk ([i]and dying[/i]) with [i]contempt and disdain[/i]:
[b]Consider[/b] "[i][b]Contractor served troops dirty food in dirty kitchens[/b][/i]" on http://www.taipeitimes.com/Ne... :
The Pentagon repeatedly warned contractor Halliburton-KBR that the food it served to US troops in Iraq was "dirty," as were as the kitchens it was served in, NBC News reported on Friday.
Halliburton-Kellogg Brown and Root's promises to improve "have not been followed through," according to a Pentagon report that warned "serious repercussions may result" if the contractor did not clean up.
The Pentagon reported finding "blood all over the floor," "dirty pans," "dirty grills," "dirty salad bars" and "rotting meats ... and vegetables" in four of the military messes the company operates in Iraq, NBC said, citing Pentagon documents.
The report came as President George W. Bush fended off Pentagon reports that Halliburton-KBR overcharged US$61 million for gasoline it sold the military in Iraq. Dick Cheney ran Halliburton for five years until becoming vice president.
The company feeds 110,000 US and coalition troops daily at a cost of US$28 per troop per day, NBC said.
The Pentagon found unclean conditions at four locations in Iraq, including one in Baghdad and two in Tikrit. Even the mess hall where Bush served troops their Thanksgiving dinner was dirty in August, September and October, according to NBC.
This adds up to "a company that arrogantly is overcharging when they can get away with it and not providing the quality of service that they agreed to do," Representative Henry Waxman, Democrat of California, told NBC.
Halliburton-Kellogg Brown and Root told NBC that "hostile conditions" pose special challenges as they served the 21 million meals so far to the troops at 45 sites in Iraq.
"We have taken quick action to improve," the company said.
[b]Another source[/b]:
"Pentagon warned Halliburton-KBR on "dirty" food service: report" on http://www.spacewar.com/2003/...
|
|
|
| |
| Iraqi Agent Denies Meeting 9/11 Hijacker ... More Neo-Con Neo-Orwellian LIES! |
| 12.14.03 (2:36 pm) [edit] |
[b]The corrupt Bush regime is spreading ever more neo-con lies, deceptions & falsehoods ... they are well-practiced at it by now, and their arrogant neo-fascist buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters just can't seem to stop spewing endless mind-numbing, neo-orwellian fabrications ...[/b]
The neo-thugs: Cheney, Rumsfeld & Wolfowitz are desperate to persuade the [i]brain-dead & sleepy-heads [/i]in America that Saddam Hussein is somehow linked with Osama bin Laden & Al Qaida ... There is no evidence however, to support their false claims ... and indeed, Hussein ([i]a secular leader[/i]) and bin Laden ([i]strict Islamic fundamentalist[/i]) were diametrically opposed to [i](& hated[/i]) each other ... However, the embezzler, thief & liar Ahmed Chalabi and his gang of goons ([i]whom the neo-cons want to install as their puppet-dictator in Iraq[/i]) are ready to "cook-up" whatever falsified documents and concocted information are "[i]needed[/i]" to re-invigorate the neo-con's failing & barbaric neo-fascist agenda.
Before "We the People" fall for more of the neo-con's con-games, scams & swindles, we perhaps ought to carefully read the [i]fine print [/i]... as the recent so-called neo-[i]memo[/i] http://www.wnd.com/news/artic... , purporting that Al Qaida was being trained by Iraqis-- has not, as yet, been verified and confirmed by reputable intelligence agencies ... and is only being circulated by the [i]extreme right-wing neo-con mouth-pieces [/i]that pander to the corrupt Bush regime. These are the same neo-fascist media outlets that perpetrate all of the other mendacious neo-con propaganda that has proven untrue.
Consider "[b][i]Iraqi Agent Denies He Met 9/11 Hijacker in Prague Before Attacks on the U.S.[/i][/b]" on http://www.nytimes.com/2003/1... :
WASHINGTON, Dec. 12 — A former Iraqi intelligence officer who was said to have met with the suspected leader of the Sept. 11 attacks has told American interrogators the meeting never happened, according to United States officials familiar with classified intelligence reports on the matter.
Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, the former intelligence officer, was taken into custody by the United States in July. Under questioning he has said that he did not meet with Mohamed Atta in Prague, according to the officials, who have reviewed classified debriefing reports based on the interrogations.
American officials caution that Mr. Ani may have been lying to American interrogators, but the only other person reported to have attended the meeting was Mr. Atta, who died in the crash of his hijacked plane into the World Trade Center.
Reports that an Iraqi spy had met with Mr. Atta in Prague first circulated soon after the attacks on New York and the Pentagon, but they have been in dispute ever since.
Czech government officials initially confirmed the reports, even as the Central Intelligence Agency and the Federal Bureau of Investigation said they could not corroborate them. Conservatives both inside and out of the Bush administration, arguing for war with Iraq, pointed to the reports as evidence of a link between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, the terrorist organization that planned the Sept. 11 attacks.
During the period between the Sept. 11 attacks and the war, the reports of the Prague meeting came under intense scrutiny from the C.I.A., the F.B.I., the Pentagon and the White House.
Possible contacts between Mr. Atta and Mr. Ani seemed to offer the clearest potential connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda at a time when the Bush administration was arguing that invading Iraq was part of its campaign against terrorism.
But the C.I.A. and F.B.I. eventually concluded that the meeting probably did not take place, and that there was no hard evidence that Mr. Hussein's government was involved in the Sept. 11 plot.
That put the intelligence agencies at odds with hard-liners at the Pentagon and the White House, who came to believe that C.I.A. analysts had ignored evidence that proved links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. Eventually, the Prague meeting became a central element in a battle between the C.I.A. and the administration's hawks over prewar intelligence.
Since American forces toppled the Hussein government and the United States gained access to captured Iraqi officials and Iraqi files, the C.I.A. has not yet uncovered evidence that has altered its prewar assessment concerning the connections between Mr. Hussein and Osama bin Laden, the leader of Al Qaeda, officials said.
American intelligence officials say they believe there were contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda in the 1990's, but there is no proof that they ever conducted joint operations.
Senior operatives of Al Qaeda who have been captured by the United States since Sept. 11 have also denied any alliance between the organization and Mr. Hussein.
Abu Zubaydah, one of the highest-ranking Qaeda leaders in American custody, told the C.I.A. that Mr. bin Laden rejected the idea of working with Mr. Hussein, a secular leader whom Mr. bin Laden considered corrupt and irredeemable, according to a September 2002 classified intelligence report obtained by The New York Times.
Mr. Zubaydah said that some Qaeda operatives wanted the organization to try to take advantage of Mr. Hussein's hatred for the United States in order to obtain military material or other support from Iraq. But Mr. bin Laden and his top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, were strongly opposed to working with Iraq, according to the report of Mr. Zubaydah's debriefing, which was obtained from Bush administration officials.
Al Qaeda's leadership "viewed the Iraqis, particularly the military and security services, as corrupt, irreligious and hypocritical in that they succumb to Western vices while concurrently remaining at war with the United States," the report says, summarizing Mr. Zubaydah's statements. "The Iraqis were not viewed as true jihadists, and there was doubt amongst the senior Al Qaeda leadership on the depth of Saddam's commitment to destroy Israel and further the cause of cleansing the Holy Land of infidel influences or presence."
The debriefing report contains significant caveats, warning that Mr. Zubaydah, who was captured in March 2002, might be seeking to mislead the United States.
Separately, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, Al Qaeda's chief of operations until his capture on March 1, 2003, in Pakistan, has also told interrogators that Al Qaeda never agreed to work with Mr. Hussein, officials said.
But even as the C.I.A. has played down the connection, the report of a Prague meeting has continued to resonate among administration conservatives. As recently as September, two months after Mr. Ani was captured, Vice President Dick Cheney referred to the Prague meeting during an appearance on the NBC News program "Meet the Press."
Asked about links between Iraq and Al Qaeda, Mr. Cheney replied: "With respect to 9/11, of course, we've had the story that's been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we've never been able to develop any more of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don't know."
The story first emerged in October 2001, when the Czech interior minister said publicly that there was evidence that Mr. Atta had met with Mr. Ani in April 2001. At the time, Mr. Ani was serving as an Iraqi intelligence officer under diplomatic cover at the Iraqi Embassy in Prague.
Later, many Czech government officials became much more skeptical that the meeting ever took place, particularly after it became clear that the initial intelligence report from the Czech domestic intelligence agency concerning the meeting had come from a single informant in the local Arab community.
The information was treated skeptically by Czech intelligence experts because it had been provided only after the Sept. 11 attacks, after Mr. Atta's picture had been broadcast on television and published in newspapers around the world, and after the Czech press reported that records showed that Mr. Atta had once traveled to Prague.
Czech officials have said that border police records showed that Mr. Atta, who was then living in Hamburg, Germany, did come to Prague in June 2000, after obtaining a visa in late May. Shortly after arriving in Prague on that occasion, Mr. Atta flew to Newark.
American records now indicate that Mr. Atta was in Virginia Beach, Va., in early April 2001, when he was supposedly in Prague to meet Mr. Ani.
|
|
|
| |
| Saddam Hussein Isn't GOD: He Is Finally Captured ... What About Tomorrow??? |
| 12.14.03 (6:18 am) [edit] |
[b]Saddam Hussein isn't GOD ... He is finally captured after tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis & hundreds of Americans have been ruthlessly slaughtered to enrich Bush's neo-fascist corporate cronies ... One man who evaded the entire Bush regime for over 7 months ... [i]What about tomorrow???[/i][/b]
The corrupt neo-con Bush regime has been saying all along that the capture of Saddam Hussein did not matter ... Dubya kept repeating in his imbecilic "[i]Mission Accomplished[/i]" screeds that Saddam Hussein was "[i]gone[/i]" and that the Iraqis were now "[i]free[/i]" ... Dubya's handlers kept saying it didn't matter ... until it eventually, after months of bloody massacres, carnage, mayhem & chaos ... it [i]finally, finally, finally [/i]takes place! ... [i]Is it too little too late?[/i]
The Iraqi people may naturally "[i]feel better[/i]", but they have as yet to resolve the issues of lack of security ... rape of their OIL ... swindling, plundering and looting of their businesses and assets ... by the neo-fascist Bush regime. Tomorrow the Iraqi people will awaken from today's[i] party [/i]and will suffer from a [i]nightmarish hangover [/i]... Iraqis will be asking "[i]What about tomorrow???[/i]"
The sordid & squalid Bush/Cheney Inc. j[i]unta[/i] are certainly [i]lucky, lucky, lucky [/i]crooks-- this[i] long-awaited [/i]capture tragically [i]wipes off the radar news screen[/i], the [b]criminal war-profiteering [/b]by their corrupt corporate cronies: Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal, et al. War-profiteering and rapacious defrauding of the American taxpayers, Afghanistanis and Iraqis are the real motives of these insane and tragic neo-con Bush wars ... But let us all[i] celebrate (ha ha ha) [/i]& instead, pretend that Dubya & his regime of neo-con, neo-orwellian thugs & goons haven't lied, deceived us & falsified fabrications-- all along: about phony WMDs ... and, phony dangers posed by Saddam Hussein-- [i]who didn't even threaten us[/i].
The thuggish Bush regime today are celebrating a so-called "[i]victory[/i]" ([i]again[/i] [sic]) ... Indeed, their neo-con, neo-fascist buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters are already[i] howling, crowing & bragging [/i]about their own so-called [i]genius[/i] [sic] & so-called [i]brilliance[/i] [sic] ([i]again[/i] [sic]) ... Meanwhile, innocent people are still dying in this immoral & illegal fiasco, and our economy is still a fiscal disaster, a[i] 'train-wreck' [/i]in the making ... Behind the grandiose facade is a [i]rising Death Toll [/i]and [i]continued Misery & Mayhem [/i]([i]again[/i] [sic]) ... Americans may forget, but history will not forget the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] [i][b]Crimes Against Humanity[/b][/i].
[b]"We the People" should still be asking: [i]What about tomorrow[/i]???[/b]
[b]Sources[/b]:
"Saddam captured near Tikrit" on http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD...
"Saddam’s capture may not end unrest" on http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3...
"Car bomb kills 17, wounds 30 policemen in western Iraq" on http://story.news.yahoo.com/n...
|
|
|
| |
| Dubya Promises Investigation ... Instead 'Earth-Mover' Bulldozes Over the Truth |
| 12.13.03 (11:57 am) [edit] |
[b]In September 2003, Dubya promised to investigate and determine the truth about those within his own regime that committed a felony, having cruelly & illegally exposed the secret identity of the CIA under-cover operative[/b], Valerie Plame, whose husband, ex-Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV told the truth to America regarding the phony Niger yellow-uranium cake sales to Iraq ([i]that proved to be a bogus lie[/i]) ...
Bush mendaciously warned us about the dangers of Saddam Hussein gaining uranium yellow cakes from Niger for his Iraqi nuclear wepons programme ([i]also a bold-faced lie[/i]) in his State of the Union address last January, and knew full-well at the time, that it was a phony fabrication, but used [i]this "sexed-up" deception [/i]anyway to implant horrendous visions of "[i]mushroom clouds[/i]" wiping us all out, in order to [i]frighten us [/i]into supporting his neo-con [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i].
To expose the identity of an under-cover intelligence agent is a felony whose sentence includes jail time ([i]up to 10 years in prison[/i]) and/or a monetary fine ([i]up to $50,000[/i]). Indeed, Daddy Bush 41 labels such a heinous crime as "[i]traitorous[/i]". The petty, vindictive Bush regime wanted ugly revenge to punish Joseph Wilson for exposing of of their many, many lies, deceptions and falsehoods. In "[i]outing[/i]" his wife, they placed her life in danger, her colleagues & contacts lives in danger, and undermined our National Security because her work involved identifying foreign weapons dealers.
"We the People" have an obligation to face the cold, hard unpleasant reality that we are dealing with a neo-con, neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i]-- ready to commit any crime, any act of treason or sabotage in order to gain and retain power and great wealth. Nothing happens inside the White House without the approval of Cheney, Rove & Rice ... and these thugs & goons should be tried for treason and frog-marched off to jail where they belong.
The sordid Bushies have been employing their "earth-movers" (e.g. John "Robespierre" Ashcroft, who used to work for Karl "Joseph Goebbles" Rove) to "bulldoze" over the squalid truth ... and they hope that their ugly crimes of treason will be buried & forgotten ... http://www.talkingpointsmemo.... ... Indeed a few days ago, a "[b]Senior White House official" told the[i] Financial Times (UK)[/i] that "We [Bush White House] have let the[i] earth-movers[/i] roll in over this one (i.e. the Plame investigation) ... [/b]" ... these arrogant crooks are burying their criminal activities ... [i]And, what ever happened to Dubya's promise? ... One of many, many promises broken by the Bush regime to cover-up their many, many lies, deceptions, falsehoods & crimes [/i]...
[i][b]But not everyone forgets ... [/b][/i]
Consider "[i]Plame's leaker / Lack of progress calls for an independent counsel[/i]" on http://www.post-gazette.com/p... :
There is no indication that the Justice Department has made any progress in determining which Bush administration official blew the cover of CIA operative Valerie Plame five months ago.
This, in spite of President Bush's assignment of the task to senior professionals at the department in September, although he added publicly Oct. 7 that he didn't know if the employee would be found out.
What someone in the administration is alleged to have done is a federal crime, a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, punishable by up to 10 years in prison. The law, passed during the administration of President Reagan, is intended to protect the identities and lives of covert agents such as Ms. Plame as they carry out espionage on behalf of the United States overseas.
The leak was seen as revenge against Ms. Plame for a revelation made by her husband, retired U.S. Ambassador Joseph Wilson. He stated that the administration had been told, after an investigation he had carried out in Africa, that intelligence stating that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Niger was false.
Mr. Bush had nonetheless used the false information in his 2003 State of the Union address to support his contention that Saddam Hussein was developing nuclear weapons, a basis for the U.S. war against Iraq.
It is hard to believe that information supporting or refuting the charge of a senior administration leak isn't out there. Apart from syndicated columnist Robert Novak, who put Ms. Plame's name in print, reporters from ABC, NBC, Time and Newsday also have been cited as having been leaked the information by presidential political counselor Karl Rove.
When the matter first surfaced, this paper advocated putting the investigation first in the hands of nonpolitical Justice officials. Some members of Congress were calling for the appointment of a special independent counsel, given the possible conflict of interest created by a Justice Department headed by Attorney General John Ashcroft and the alleged involvement in the affair of Mr. Rove, an Ashcroft godfather.
Given the failure of the Justice Department to produce results in its investigation -- not even a grand jury subpoena so far -- we now recommend that an independent counsel be appointed, and that the Justice Department be required to turn over any information that has been found so far.
It's clear now that Mr. Bush's underlings heard his Oct. 7 message. The word in Washington today is that, indeed, the administration official won't be found.
That is unacceptable in terms of the implications for America's intelligence officers working in dangerous circumstances overseas. It must not be allowed to stand.
[b]Another source[/b]:
Joshua Micah Marshall's [i]TalkingPointsMemo[/i] on http://www.talkingpointsmemo....
|
|
|
| |
| Halliburton and Private Military Contractors Strike it Rich in Iraq |
| 12.13.03 (8:05 am) [edit] |
[b]Halliburton and Private Military Contractors Strike it Rich in Iraq[/b], reads a news headline similar to many headlines across the American fruited plains, and indeed around the world today.
And yet, "We the People" seem either blind, oblivious or too lazy to take action. Winston Churchill was strongly opposed to war profiteering – “[i]Why should anybody make a fortune out of the war[/i]?” he asked. And Churchill demanded that all war profits over Ł10,000 should be confiscated. Harry Truman called [b]war-profiteering[/b] "[b]treason[/b]".
Where is our outrage at the corrupt neo-con, neo-fascist Bush regime's ruthless war-profiteering? Have we not yet learnt the lessons of history and recognized that when a few greedy and corrupt men see the opportunity to amasse great power and great wealth ([i]irrespective of the destruction and harm caused to others[/i]), there is a danger that murderous consequences will ensue from such horrific blood-thirsty pursuits? Dubya's "[i]miserable failures[/i]" have turned into [i]disastrous & tragic nightmares [/i]of carnage, mayhem, slaughter & shredded lives of survivors maimed for life.
The immoral and illegal[i] wars-turned-bloody-guerri lla quagmires[/i] in Afghanistan and Iraq have enabled the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's [/i]corporate cronies ([i]Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal et al[/i].) to swindle, plunder & loot the [i]not-so-rich [/i]American taxpayers and Afghanistani & Iraqi peoples ... ([i]Dubya's 'Destroy-and-Re-build Contracts Business Inc.' that is enriching his sordid family and his squalid corporate cronies ...[/i] ... no-bidding, no-auditing, no-accountability ... and the recent Halliburton price-gouging swindle uncovered are just the [i]tips of the icebergs[/i] ...)
Please contact Congress on http://www.congress.org , and demand that the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] war-profits be confiscated and that Dubya be tried for [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i].
Consider "[b]Halliburton and Private Military Contractors Strike it Rich in Iraq[/b]" on http://www.democracynow.org/a... :
A Pentagon audit finds that Halliburton overcharged the U.S. government by as much as $61 million for gasoline delivered to Iraq. We go to Basra to speak with CorpWatch’s Pratap Chatterjee about Iraqi reconstruction and the more than 10,000 private military contractors on the ground in Iraq. [[i]Includes transcript[/i]: http://www.democracynow.org/a... ]
A Pentagon investigation has found evidence that a subsidiary of Halliburton Company overcharged the U.S. government by as much as 61 million dollars for gasoline delivered to Iraq. Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown and Root, delivers fuel to Iraq under huge no-bid reconstruction contracts that have a potential value of $15.6 billion. Separately, Pentagon officials said they rejected a proposal submitted by KBR for cafeteria services that was inflated by 67 million dollars.
The allegations of overcharging are not the first against the company, which has billed the Army for questionable expenses in the past. Halliburton did not appear to have profited from the overcharging, but had instead paid a subcontractor too much for the gasoline in the first place. The company denied overcharging and called the inquiry a "routine audit."
Halliburton's former CEO is Vice President Dick Cheney. He still receives about $150,000 in annual deferred payments from the company.
Rep. Henry Waxman, a California Democrat who has been a leading Congressional critic of the contract, said, "Halliburton has been gouging taxpayers and the White House has been letting them get away with it."
Separately, the weekly newsletter Inside the Pentagon is reporting that Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfwoitz has placed highly restrictive rules on a newly formed inspector general's office at the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. The office was created to watch out for all manner of waste, fraud, abuse and price gouging by the CPA.
The Halliburton audit came as President Bush worked to justify his decision to bar non-coalition countries from competing for primary reconstruction contracts in Iraq.
Bush said, "It's very simple. Our people risk their lives. Coalition, friendly coalition folks risk their lives, and, therefore, the contracting is going to reflect that." The president added that he might issue exemptions for those countries that write off Iraq's debt.
When told Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's said that "international law must apply here," Bush responded, "International law? I better call my lawyer. I don't know what you're talking about, about international law."
[i]Pratap Chatterjee, managing director of CorpWatch.org. He joins us on the phone from Iraq where he just arrived in Basra from Baghdad today[/i].
[b]Read the [i]short[/i] interview between Amy Goodman, Juan Gonazales & Pratap Chattergee [/b]on http://www.democracynow.org/a...
|
|
|
| |
| Takin' It To The Streets ... |
| 12.12.03 (5:49 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" are witnessing a [i]'winter of discontent' [/i]growing throughout this country in the hearts-and-minds of conscientious citizens with their increasing disgust at the corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta's [/i]Crimes Against Humanity ...[/b]
Increasingly people are [i]takin' it to the streets [/i]... on the internet ... and in dialogues in their local communities! Military families are calling for their loved ones: "[i]bring 'em home[/i]" as they don't want their dads & moms, sons & daughters, brothers & sisters, wives & husbands ... to die or be maimed-for-life, in order to enrich the corrupt Bushies' ghoulish corporate cronies ... The Bush regime's bloody guerrilla quagmire sure as hell wasn't [i]about [/i]WMDs posing an imminent threat -- nor was it [i]about[/i] democracy in Iraq -- nor is it [i]about[/i] a so-called "war on terrorism" ... There is [i][b]no business like war business [/b][/i]to enrich the squalid Bush family and their sordid corporate campaign contributors.
[b]Status quo[/b]:
[b]DAY 283[/b]-- [i]STILL NO WMDs[/i]!
[b]DAY 283 [/b]-- [i]STILL NO SADDAM HUSSEIN[/i]!
[b]DAY 821 [/b]-- [i]STILL NO OSAMA BIN LADEN[/i]!
The "Mission" definitely [i]ain't [/i]"Accomplished"! ... and Bush's disastrous domestic policies, screwed-up & rapacious fiscal policies, and ugly blood-thirsty foreign policies resulting skyrocketing misery here at home and abroad, as well as a rising Death Toll daily, and no end in sight ... are not good enough ... not at all good enough!
[b]Recommended readings[/b]:
"They Died for Halliburton" on http://www.counterpunch.org/v...
"A Deliberate Debacle" on http://www.commondreams.org/v...
"Bush's Iraq Policy: A Quagmire of Confusion" on http://www.alternet.org/story...
"Point/Counterpoint on the Bush Regime's Neo-Fascist Fiscal Policy" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Military Families Plead for Pullout" on http://www.commondreams.org/h...
|
|
|
| |
| The Real Scandal Behind The Insane Missile Defense Boondoggle ... |
| 12.12.03 (1:39 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" should not "[i]count our chickens before they hatch[/i]" ... as the old proverb wisely admonishes ... The insane Missile Defense boondoggle is another example of the stupidly dangerous & gluttonous funneling of taxpayer monies into the Military Industrial Complex's [i]Dr. Strangelovian [/i]"Defense" (sic) Industry-- instead of directing our efforts on initiatives to improve the lives of our citizens, the health of our nation, and, our relationships with other countries ... the government is paradoxically making us less secure ...[/b]
It is any wonder that the corrupt neo-con Bush regime lusts for war ... if there were no wars then there would not be any [i]"sexed-up" excuses[/i] for their ruthless plundering, swindling & looting of the U.S. Treasury, by the so-called "defense (sic)" industry & corporations ... indeed, they need all of these immoral and illegal wars to justify their obscenely over-bloated and mad expenditures that we squander on enriching their greedy corporate robber-barons, top-dogs & fat cats.
In the late 1990s, the U.S. government bragged about the success of tests using the so-called missile defense system. Later it was discovered that the tests were rigged ... Hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars were wasted only to find out that the defense-missile could only hit an incoming-target-missile that had a [i]homing-device, a receptor [/i]that effectively said to the defense-missile "[i]Here I Am, Come & Get Me [/i]"! Unfortunately, [i]real-life [/i]incoming-target-missi les don't have such "[i]homing-devices[/i]" implanted ... It was determined that the tests were a[i] phony set-up[/i], staged in order to persuade the [i]dumb-bunny [/i]public that it is worthwhile pouring our hard-earned taxpayer dollars down a sink-hole ...
Subsequently another set of tests were executed and the missile defense system inconsistently worked [i]off-and-on[/i] if there was a single incoming-target-missile in the sky ... In fact, the missile defense system[i] ran amok [/i]if more than one object was in the sky ... So let's say 10 incoming-target-missiles were launched and only 1 of which is real & the rest duds-- the missile defense system doesn't have a clue which one to destroy. In fact, if there is an airplane nearby, it might mistakenly be destroyed!
Coincidentally, yesterday the neo-con "crazies" at the Pentagon announced a $4.6 Billion boondoggle awarded to one of their corporate pimps, Lockheed Martin for continued development of the Missile Defense system. Today, the Pentagon announces that a so-called "successful(?)" test took place in the Pacific ... Does anyone want to "[i]Connect the Dots[/i]"?
It doesn't take a nobel-prize winner to ask ([i]given the squalid & sordid history surrounding this Defense Industry "pork-barrel" spending ... and past rigged & failed Missile Defense system tests[/i]) what the modalities, criteria & standards of the so-called "tests" actually were, before passing judgment!
Frankly, before anyone believes the "[i]bragging[/i]" & "[i]crowing[/i]" by Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] mad-dog buffoons ... we should demand a full explanation to comprehend just what the nature of the testing that took place was ... and how these tests square with real live dangers ... To-date experts in defense and weapons systems agree that the Missile Defense boondoggles are another scandalous swindle to enrich corporate crooks ... Given the corrupt Bush regime's mendacious [i]track-record [/i] for [i]corporate-give-aways [/i] ... perhaps we all should wait until we are able to read the[i] fine print[/i]!
Moreover, one must also ask whether or not this [i]so-called [/i]Missile Defense system will, in reality, make us any safer or better off? If your next door neighbor amasses thousand of rifles, ammunition & weapons-- and his family is suffering because he is in debt and can't afford to take care of them, are they really more secure or stable? Of course not ... it is wrong-headed and dangerously stupid thinking ... If we deny our citizens basic needs & create a barbaric society on the [i]off-chance [/i]that someone might possibly ([i]although they never have ... and have no motivation to ... [/i]) launch a missile our way ... what did we in fact gain?
An honest cost/benefit analysis has never been done and has never been debated publically on defense spending versus real threats. We must beware of being frightened & intimidated by imaginary goblins & monsters abroad drummed-up by corrupt politicos ... when the real threats we face are an impoverished people enslaved by greedy corporate thugs & goons here at home.
[b]Ultimately we must ask whether or not this Missile Defense boondoggle was worth it ... or were there instead, better ways to spend our hard-earned taxpayer money ... Finally, what is the matter with diplomacy? [/b]
[b]Sources[/b]:
"US signs $4.6bn missile contract" on http://www.theaustralian.news...,5744,8130201%255E1702,00 .html
"Missile Defense Failures Offer Lessons" on http://www.ceip.org/programs/...
"U.S. missile defense test fails" on http://216.26.163.62/2002/ss_...
"US military to test missile defense system" on http://www.hindustantimes.com...,00050001.htm
"Understanding the Extraordinary Cost of Missile Defense" on http://www.rand.org/natsec_ar...
|
|
|
| |
| US Audit Confirms Halliburton Gouged American Taxpayers & Iraqis: War-Profiteering! |
| 12.12.03 (10:22 am) [edit] |
[b]The corrupt Bush regime's neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters are again lying to the American public and only brain-dead sheep will believe their mind-numbing screed and endless drivel. Halliburton war-profits skyrocket [ http://www.informationclearin... ] ... they sure as hell[i] ain't [/i]helping the homeless in America ... ho ho ho![/b].
Veep Cheney's [i]pimp[/i] Halliburton (as well as Dubya's [i]pimps[/i] Carlyle Group & Bechtel, Unocal, etc.) are raping, swindling, plundering & looting Americans and Iraqis ... The real[i] casus belli [/i]for the neo-fascist Bushies' insane [i]war-and-destroy fiascos, [/i]in order that their [i]corporate-take-all [/i]thugs & goons can [i]re-construct-and-enric h [/i]themselves, is the squalid & sordid truth behind their immoral and illegal incursions into Afghanistan and Iraq.
Claims about the nature of their blood-thirsty war-profiteering:-- ... They hilariously pretend not to be profitting from their immoral price-gouging??? Uh-huh ... in the [b]Doctrine According to the Bushies[/b]: [i][b]The Enron-Style Accounting Will Let These Greedy Corporate Executives Making $500,000,000+ Per Year Qualify For WELFARE!!! [/b][/i]Don't shed any tears for these corporate rapists ... they won't be standing in any soup lines this Christmas!!!
"We the People" are witness to the most horrendous 'anti-christian' war-profiteering to occur in modern times ... And, the Halliburton scandal is only the[i] tip-of-the-iceberg[/i]:-- No-bid, no-audit, no-accountability gifts awarded by the [i]Mad King George[/i] ... Ah, [i][b]there's no business like war business [/b][/i]for our rapacious neo-con feudal lords.
Write to your Congress on http://www.congress.org and demand that war-profits be confiscated and that the Bush regime be tried for their horrific [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i].
Consider "Oil firm 'overcharged' US in Iraq" on http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/bu... :
An oil services firm formerly run by US Vice President Dick Cheney may have overcharged US forces in Iraq by some $61m, a Pentagon audit has found.
The firm, Kellogg, Brown and Root - a subsidiary of Halliburton - has denied charging too much for fuel for troops.
Pentagon officials say the firm is not alleged to have profited from the overcharging, but it may have paid a local sub-contractor too much for fuel.
They said the Pentagon was working with KBR to resolve the fuel-pricing issue.
One defence official was quoted as saying there was no reason to believe the problems were anything other than "stupid mistakes" by the firm.
[b]Controversy[/b]
However, the BBC's Nick Childs at the Pentagon says it is being treated as an issue of serious concern.
The Pentagon also said the firm had been planning to charge $67m too much for another contract to supply cafeteria services.
The controversy comes at a difficult time for the Bush administration, which is under fire for limiting bids on a new round of Iraq contracts to countries which supported the US-led war there, says our correspondent.
Reacting to the accusations of overcharging, Halliburton spokeswoman Wendy Hall said she was confident the company would be able to stand up to any audit of its work in Iraq.
"KBR has acted in full accordance with its fiduciary and contractual responsibilities under the contract," she told Reuters news agency.
[b]Criticism[/b]
Two Democrat congressmen raised questions about the prices Halliburton charges in October.
One of them, Henry Waxman of California, reportedly obtained government documents showing that Halliburton is charging an average of $2.64 per gallon to import fuel from Kuwait - more than twice as much as others are paying for Kuwaiti fuel.
The New York Times reported that Halliburton was receiving 26 cents a gallon for "overhead and fee," according to the Army Corps of Engineers.
An oil economist told the newspaper that was "a monopoly premium".
"I've never seen anything like it in my life," Phil Verleger, president of the consulting firm PK Verleger, told the newspaper.
[b]'Danger'[/b]
Halliburton says that the dangers of transporting oil to Iraq make it necessary to charge high prices.
Ms Hall said more than 20 of the company's trucks had been damaged or stolen and that nine drivers had been injured and one killed bringing fuel into Iraq.
"To allege that KBR is overcharging for this needed service insults the KBR employees who are performing this dangerous mission to help bring fuel to the people of Iraq," Ms Hall said in October when questions were first raised about the contract.
Iraq has one of the world's largest oil reserves but must import fuel because its infrastructure was seriously damaged by more than a decade of sanctions and war.
[b]No-bid contract [/b]
Halliburton was awarded a contract - for which it did not have to compete against other firms - to rebuild Iraq's oil industry.
The company has received $2bn in work since it was given the contract in March, the Reuters news agency reports.
Some of the fuel payments to Halliburton come out of the Development Fund for Iraq which is meant to pay for humanitarian efforts in the country.
The US is reportedly looking for ways to handle importing fuel itself, rather than subcontracting the task.
[b]Sources[/b]:
"Halliburton Profits Skyrocket On Iraq Deals" on http://www.informationclearin...
"Indonesia at the Crossroads: U.S. Weapons Sales and Military Training ... [Halliburton Weapons Sales]" on http://www.worldpolicy.org/pr...
"Pentagon: Halliburton Overcharges U.S. $61M" on http://www.democracynow.org/a... :
[i]A Pentagon investigation has found evidence that a subsidiary of Halliburton Company overcharged the U.S. government by as much as 61 million dollars for gasoline delivered to Iraq. Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg, Brown and Root, delivers fuel to Iraq under huge no-bid reconstruction contracts that have a potential value of $15.6 billion. Separately, Pentagon officials said they rejected a proposal submitted by KBR for cafeteria services that was inflated by 67 million dollars. Vice President Dick Cheney headed up Halliburton before he took office[/i].
|
|
|
| |
| Point/Counterpoint on the Bush Regime's Neo-Fascist Fiscal Policy |
| 12.12.03 (8:19 am) [edit] |
[b]The Bush regime's neo-fascist fiscal and domestic policies are as disastrous for the United States of America, as their insane neo-con foreign policies are horrific bloody fiascos for the entire world[/b].
Dubya has immorally [i](& illegally[/i]?) awarded massive boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts to his corrupt corporate cronies, corporations, wealthiest robber-barons and plutocrats, and his greedy campaign contributors, in the largest re-distribution of wealth from America's working people to the top 5%[i] richest-of-the-rich [/i]in our nation's history. [i]Meanwhile[/i] ...
* Dubya's [i]highest job loss since the Great Depression [/i]of over 3.3 million jobs ... with between 9-15 million people now out of work ... and unemployment benefits slashed for those in need ... is responsible for tragic misery and an increase in crime ...
* Dubya's [i]highest deficits in our nation's history [/i]at nearly $560 Billion for 2003 alone, and $1.9 Trillion for his disastrous term-in-office ... leaving massive debts for working people to pay-off, as basic services needed for a civilized society are slashed ...
* Over 35 million [i]families living below the 1960's-defined poverty line in the richest nation on earth [/i](it's much worse than that) ... and 3.5 million citizens are [i]homeless [/i]... as people are left to suffer with a shameless, uncivilized callousness ...
* Between 45-85 million citizens with[i] no health care coverage [/i]... as people are left to die or live in pain, as the richest among us live like neo-emperors ...
The [b]barbaric, callous and arrogant Bush regime [/b]is returning us to the[b] Dark Ages[/b], where the powerful & wealthy exploit and abuse those who are vulnerable and working people. [b]"We the People" must bring this rapacious and destructive move towards a neo-feudal slave state to an end. There is a better way ...[/b]
In "[i]Point/Counterpoint on Administration Fiscal Policy[/i]" on http://www.americanprogress.o... , they cite the following:
On December 10, Office of Managemant and Budget Director Joshua Bolton published an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal detailing the administration’s fiscal policy and approach to the deficit. American Progress Senior Economic Advisor Gene Sperling responds.
[b]OMB Director Bolton[/b]: “[i]From the left, the president's tax cuts are blamed for driving the federal budget into deficit[/i].”
• The critique of the administration’s deficit exploding policies has not only, or even most vocally, been from the left. A number of independent organizations including the Committee for Economic Development, the Concord Coalition, and Goldman Sachs, along with individual voices like those of former Republican Commerce Secretary Peter J. Peterson and a group of 10 Nobel Prize winning economists, have harshly criticized the long-term fiscal damage done by the President’s tax cuts.
[b]OMB Director Bolton[/b]: "[i]Had there not been one dime of tax relief under President Bush, the federal budget would still have run a substantial deficit in 2003[/i]."
• This statement is not only misleading, but misses the point.
• First, to suggest that the Bush tax cuts have been only a minor factor in the fiscal deterioration we have witnessed is flat wrong. The tax cuts are the largest single contributor to the deterioration of our budget outlook, and will continue to impose huge costs in years to come – over $600 billion in 2013 alone, including interest cost.
• Second, this is an example of the Bush administration’s disciplined effort to confuse the short-term with the long term in order to justify its reckless policies. Let’s be clear: everyone agrees that running short-term deficits in order to offer well-targeted economic stimulus or national security during times of recession or war is certainly justified. But the Bush administration has used the need for short-term stimulus as cover to pass long term tax cuts that not only provide little short term support but will end up costing us trillions in coming decades.
[b]OMB Director Bolton[/b]: [i]“[T]he president's tax cuts have been critical to his priority of strengthening the economy and creating jobs. Perhaps the best timed in American history, these tax cuts deserve much credit for today's brightening economic picture: the highest quarterly growth in 20 years (8.2 percent), which, though unlikely to remain as high, is a harbinger of sustained growth to come[/i]”
• Last time we checked, President Bush has been president since January 20, 2001. Like an 0-9 football coach heading into the last couple of games of his season, this administration wants to take credit for a single quarter of growth in 2003, rather that acknowledge that in both 2001 and 2002 they missed significant opportunities to pass short-term, high bang-for-the-buck stimulus that could have jumpstarted the economy far earlier.
• In 2001, the administration offered no direct stimulus in their initial tax cut package that would have taken effect during the recession. The administration came around to including a partial advance on the lowest rate reductions, which was inspired by calls for a fast-acting tax rebate that would put money in the hands of Americans in 2001. Yet since the administration insisted that the advance be non-refundable, it left out the 34 million low-income taxpayers with the highest propensity to spend.
• In 2002, with our economy in desperate need of a jumpstart, the administration stalled stimulus negotiations by pushing the retroactive elimination of the corporate alternative minimum tax (AMT), a provision which would have provided a $254 million tax break to Enron. For the second year in a row, the administration missed an opportunity to pass a bipartisan stimulus package with a rebate during the critical holiday season.
• Even the 2003 tax cut is more of a vindication of progressive policies that an example that the administration’s tax cut agenda has been at all effective in stimulating the economy. Overall, the economic consulting firm Economy.com found that the tax cuts were responsible for only 13 percent of the growth last quarter – meaning that we still would have seen GDP growth of about 7 percent without the tax cut. But even the modest contribution of the tax cut was predominantly due to its short-term, targeted components – the child tax credit and the bonus depreciation for business investment – that progressives have always supported. Even if one generously assumes that the tax cuts added $30 billion to the economy in the third quarter, it would hardly be justification for passing two tax cuts that if made permanent could cost more than $3 trillion over the coming decade.
• Imagine if President Bush had called together Republicans and Democrats two-and-a-half years ago and asked for a bipartisan commitment to enact significant short-term, targeted stimulus policies alongside a commitment to longterm fiscal discipline. We could have seen a return to job growth far earlier without undermining confidence in our long term fiscal situation.
[b]OMB Director Bolton[/b]: “[[i]J]ob growth, which typically lags recovery, should continue to strengthen in the months ahead[/i].”
• Director Bolton may be right that job growth typically lags other indicators in a recovery, but the persistence of this recovery’s job loss far exceeds the norm.
• The first two years of this recovery – from November 2001 when the recession officially ended to October 2003 – had the worst job loss of any first two years of a recovery since the Great Depression.
• Following such historic job loss – nearly 3 million private sector jobs since the recession began – we need robust job growth to not only provide jobs for the population-driven expansion in the labor force but also for all of those who have lost their jobs. Currently the average length of unemployment is at its highest rate since 1984, and, as American Progress Senior Economist Christian Weller has pointed out, there are 7.9 million fewer jobs than there should be given the typical employment growth in recoveries since the 1960s.
• The modest job gains we have seen over the past four months are far from robust, and are indeed anemic compared to previous recoveries. If we assume that monthly job growth picks back up to October’s level of 137,000 new jobs (despite having fallen to 57,000 in November), and that we are able to sustain that rate for the entire year through October 2004, it would still end up being the worst third year of a recovery since 1958.
[b]OMB Director Bolton[/b]: “[i]The increases in all other discretionary accounts have been modest by historical standards. In the last budget year of the previous administration (FY '01), domestic spending unrelated to defense or homeland security grew by an eye-popping 15 percent. With the adoption of President Bush's first budget (FY '02), that number was reduced to 6 percent; then 5 percent the following year; and now 3 percent for the current fiscal year[/i]."
• This comparison leaves out the fact that nondefense discretionary spending declined substantially as a share of our economy under President Clinton. During Clinton’s second term – a period when some feared the appearance of surpluses would create great pressure to increase spending – nondefense discretionary spending averaged 3.3 percent of GDP, compared to 3.8 percent under President Reagan, 3.7 percent under the first President Bush, and 3.7 percent in the last two years, due in large part to increases in international aid and homeland security.
• Spending restraint alone will not be enough to close the hole that the administration’s policies are blowing in the budget. According to an analysis by the Committee for Economic Development, the Concord Coalition, and the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, eliminating deficits of the magnitude we will be facing through spending reductions alone would require cutting Social Security by 60 percent, defense spending by 73 percent, or all programs outside defense, homeland security, Medicare, and Social Security by 40 percent.
[b]OMB Director Bolton[/b]: [i]“[W]e still face a deficit in the $500 billion range for the current fiscal year - larger than anyone wants. But that size deficit, at roughly 4.5 percent of GDP (compared with a modern peak of 6 percent during the Reagan years), is not historically out of range; and it is entirely manageable, if we continue the president's strong pro-growth economic policies and sound fiscal restraint[/i].”
• We concede that a deficit of 4.5 percent of GDP would not be the largest we have faced since World War II as a percent of GDP. The administration has the bragging rights of presiding over only the sixth worst deficit in the last 57 years by that measure. But referring to such a deficit as “manageable” misses a couple key points:
• The only reason the deficit is 4.5 percent of GDP is because the commitment to fiscal discipline and saving surpluses for Social Security in the 1990s put us in a position to respond to the double whammy of a recession and Sept. 11, 2001 with strength. Had the Clinton administration adopted a policy of tolerating 4.5 percent of GDP deficits, rather than leaving office with a projected surplus of 3.3 percent of GDP in 2004, the fiscal deterioration we have experienced over the past three years would have left us with historically unprecedented deficits in excess of 12 percent of GDP.
• On the verge of the baby boom retirement and facing new unknown costs of homeland security, our standard should not be to simply ensure that deficits do not get as bad as the worst years of the 1980s – one of the worst fiscal decades of the last century. In 2008, the year the first baby boomers begin retiring, we are projected to be $6.2 trillion deeper in debt – the equivalent of $84,000 for every family of four – than we were projected to be when President Bush took office. Our nation had worked its way out of its deficit problem in the 1990s through tough choices, a bipartisan commitment to fiscal responsibility, and a pay-as-you-go approach to any new entitlement or tax cut initiatives -- a policy the current administration has abandoned.
[b]OMB Director Bolton[/b]: “[i]Indeed, with adoption of the president's policies, our projections show a solid path toward cutting the deficit in half, toward a size that is below 2 percent of GDP, within the next five years[/i].”
• Even assuming a solid expansion, independent assessments from Goldman Sachs and the Committee for Economic Development and Concord Coalition, based on more realistic budget projections, are forecasting deficits of $400 - $600 billion or about 3 to 4 percent of GDP for the entire decade.
[i][b]Gene B. Sperling is a Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress[/b][/i]. [i]He served in the Clinton Administration as the President’s National Economic Advisor and Director of the National Economic Council. Mr. Sperling was the third person to hold the role of chief economic advisor in the White House, following Robert Rubin and Laura Tyson.
Mr. Sperling, who served as either National Economic Advisor or as Deputy NEC Director for all eight years, was called by Mr. Clinton “the MVP” of the economic team. As Director of the NEC, Mr. Sperling was responsible for coordinating domestic and international economic cabinet members. Mr. Sperling coordinated the President’s Social Security and debt reduction efforts, and played a key role in such initiatives as the 1993 Deficit Reduction Act, the expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit and technology literacy initiative.
Mr. Sperling also works on a variety of economic and international issues in several capacities: he is Senior Fellow for Economic Policy and Director of the Center on Universal Education at the Council of Foreign Relations; a weekly Economic Columnist for Bloomberg News; a frequent commentator on CNBC, Bloomberg Television, CNN, and Evening News on federal reserve policy, consumer confidence, and tax and budget issues; and is a contributing writer and consultant on NBC television drama, The West Wing.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| War-Profiteer Halliburton Is Gouging American Taxpayers & Iraqis |
| 12.11.03 (5:49 pm) [edit] |
[b]One of the [i]whorish[/i] Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's [/i][i]pimps[/i], Halliburton is price-gouging the [i]not-rich[/i]-American taxpayers[/b] (& Iraqis) by over-charging in their massive, no-bid, no-audit, no-accountability contracts; awarded as[i] payback [/i]for all those nice fat, juicy campaign contributions that financed the corrupt Bush regime's rigged banana republican coup d'etat in 2000!
Public outrage forced audits that have revealed the squalid and sordid [i]tip-of-the-iceberg [/i]of the[i] Bush's corporate cronies' price-gouging & over-charging[/i]. Halliburton, Carlyle Group, Unocal, Bechtel and the other corporate cronies to whom the neo-fascist Bushies pay homage, are swindling, plundering and looting the average American worker and Iraqi people. [i][b] There is no business like war business to amasse huge profits ... so long as other people do the dying.[/b][/i]
"We the People" should remember Winston Churchill's dire admonition ... Churchill was strongly opposed to war profiteering – “[i]Why should anybody make a fortune out of the war[/i]?” he asked. And demanded that all war profits over Ł10,000 should be confiscated. Churchill knew full well that not only is it immoral, but "[i]connect the dots[/i]" and the powerful will devise wars in order to profit ... after all, bomb & destroy-- and then you've got a lot of re-construction ahead of you ... [i]big, very big business[/i] ...
[b]The profits being stolen by the corrupt Bush family, the Cheneys, and their [i]criminals-in-arms [/i]corporate rapists, from the blood, sweat and tears of Americans and Iraqis, should be confiscated, and these thugs & goons should be frog-marched off to jail[/b].
[b]Of course, the insane neo-con Bush regime waged their neo-fascist wars on Afghanistan & Iraq for the very purpose of enriching their corporate campaign contributors, and as such, are traitors. The corrupt Bushies should be tried for [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i][/b].
Consider "Pentagon audit finds Halliburton overcharged" on http://famulus.msnbc.com/Famu... :
[b]A Pentagon audit of Halliburton, the oil services firm once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, has found the company overcharged for fuel it brought into Kuwait from Iraq, military sources said on Thursday[/b].
The sources told Reuters that Kellogg Brown and Root, which won a no-bid U.S. government contract to rebuild Iraq's oil industry, had been notified by the Pentagon's Defense Contract Audit Agency of the overpricing.
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Pentagon queries Halliburton Iraq work costs", Financial Times, on http://news.ft.com/servlet/Co...
"Halliburton Iraq ties more than Cheney said" on http://www.newsmax.com/archiv...
" Halliburton Makes a Killing on Iraq War - Cheney's Former Company Profits from Supporting Troops" on http://www.corpwatch.org/issu...
"Bush Pre-Judges SEC on Halliburton - House GOP Born-Again Reformers" on http://www.thedailyenron.com/...
|
|
|
| |
| Members of Congress Letter to Condi Rice |
| 12.11.03 (11:34 am) [edit] |
[b]Three Members of Congress Letter to Condi Rice [/b]asking why the US has spent hundreds of millions in an almost certainly fruitless search for WMD in Iraq and almost nothing making sure Iraqi weapons scientists don't sell their know-how to other countries.
Condi Rice was assigned to manage the Iraqi Stabilization Group (ISG) on the 7th October 2003 [http://www.guardian.co.uk/Ira...,2763,1057494,00.html ] ... Since then, the situation has deteriorated on every front ... The security in Iraq gets worse each and every day ... There is no plan ... There is no co-ordination between the White House & Pentagon ... What are Dubya & Condi [i]doing[/i]?
[b]"We the People" should demand more accountability for the thousands of precious lives squandered and the billions-of-[i]hard-earne d[/i]-taxpayer-dollars-[i ]gone-missing [/i]down a [i]black hole [/i]([i]and into the pockets of the Bush family & their corporate cronies[/i]) ... in Iraq[/b].
[b]Read the Congressional Letter on http://talkingpointsmemo.com/... ...[/b]
[b]Source[/b]:
TalkingPointsMemo by[i] Joshua Micah Marshall [/i]on http://www.talkingpointsmemo....
|
|
|
| |
| Dubya Is Back-Tracking Already Because He NEEDS "Old Europe" |
| 12.11.03 (8:57 am) [edit] |
[b]Dubya is already[i] back-tracking [/i]because he NEEDS "Old Europe"[/b] to help him out of his messy, bloody guerrilla quagmire in Iraq ... Conservatives and liberals alike agree that the situation is dire ... a fiasco ... or as even the neo-fascist Newt Gingrich claims "[i]off the cliff[/i]" ... Refer also to Patrick J. Buchanan's article "Here we go again" on http://www.wnd.com/news/artic... . ... While Dubya may [i]play tough-guy [/i]for the audience here at home, he is a very, very worried guy [i]in over his head [/i]...
Bush was on the phone yesterday, in a [i]panic-stricken modus operandi[/i], begging "Old Europe" ([i]France, Germany, Russia, etc[/i].) for troops, money and to forgive Iraq's debts. Meanwhile, the Pentagon was satisfying the [i]blood-lust and petty revenge [/i]of their neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters, by "[i]punishing[/i]" our old allies ... Ha ha ha ha ha!!!
However, it appears that the Pentagon is being[i] reigned-in[/i] (by James A. Baker?), because you can't very well [i]demand favors and kick people in the back-side[/i] -- at the same time ... Somebody ought to conduct a course in [i]Human Psychology 101 [/i]for the Bushies.
[b]"We the People" are witness to an imbecilic neo-con, neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] in turmoil ... they are imploding ...[/b]
Consider "[i][b]Roll-out of controversial Iraq contracts delayed[/b][/i]" on http://www.forbes.com/markets... :
WASHINGTON, Dec 10 (Reuters) - The Pentagon on Wednesday delayed the issue of $18.6 billion in U.S. tenders to rebuild Iraq amid criticism over the exclusion from bidding of firms from France, Germany, Russia and other war opponents.
The prime contracts were set to be advertised last Friday, but were delayed while "high-level" policy decisions took place. A further delay was announced on Wednesday after earlier promises of release on Monday and Tuesday.
"The scheduled release of the solicitations in support of the Iraq reconstruction contracts has been temporarily delayed," said a notice on the Pentagon-run Iraq Program Management Office Web site (www.rebuilding-iraq.net).
Deidre Lee, director of defense procurement at the Pentagon, attributed the delay to questions being addressed by procurement experts and said she hoped the contracts would be advertised within the next few days.
"Our intent is to get the RFPs (request for proposals) out as soon as possible," Lee said.
The 26 contracts are funded by money appropriated from the U.S. Congress and cover electricity, communications, public buildings, transportation, public works, security and justice as well as the rebuilding of Iraq's army.
Lee said experts were examining many questions raised by prospective bidders, including insurance and security issues.
One of the most contentious issues was the decision by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to bar bidding from firms whose governments did not support the war effort, such as France, Germany, Russia and Canada. Berlin, Moscow and Ottawa strongly criticized the move on Wednesday.
[b]MANY OPPORTUNITIES[/b]
Lee said there were many opportunities for sub-contractors in Iraq for countries not on the list of 63 eligible nations.
"Those are the prime opportunities but there are many, many many opportunities for sub contracts."
The Iraq Program Management Office has set an aggressive timetable for bidders, with the award date for work set for the first week in February, a deadline officials hoped to meet despite the delay in rolling out tenders.
In addition to the 26 contracts, two other contracts to rebuild Iraq's oil industry are set to be awarded within the next month after several months of delay.
These will replace a no-competition deal awarded in March to Halliburton (nyse: HAL - news - people) , the Texas-based oil services company once run by Vice President Dick Cheney, which has been accused of price gouging, a charge it denies.
A military source expected these two oil contracts, worth $2 billion, would be announced before Christmas.
All of the contracts are being closely watched by the General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of the U.S. Congress, which has sent teams to Iraq. The Pentagon is also auditing the work of Halliburton and others.
[b]Watch and see [/b]...
"U.S. allies threaten retaliation for U.S. decision to ban war critics from contracts" on http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin... -
|
|
|
| |
| Two More U.S. Soldiers Killed In Iraq ... When Will It End? |
| 12.11.03 (8:03 am) [edit] |
[b]Two more U.S. Soldiers were killed in Iraq [/b]yesterday ... When will the slaughter of innocents, the blood-letting, carnage, misery and mayhem end? Not until the Bush family and their corporate cronies have enriched themselves off of the blood, sweat and tears of the [i]not-rich [/i]American taxpayers and the Iraqi people.
While the fat and [i]safe-n-secure [/i]neo-con[i] arm-chair chicken-hawks [/i]are playing imbecilic and dangerously stupid "[i]games[/i] (sic)", and are happily ensconced in heavily [i]armed-n-guarded[/i], plush offices and palaces, stuffing their bulging faces with rich food & swilling wine at banquets ... Meanwhile, our men and women in the military are embroiled in an unnecessary bloody guerrilla quagmire with no end in sight ... no exit strategy ... no plan ...
Moreover,[i][b] one-third of U.S. trained Iraqi soldiers have quit[/b][/i] [ http://story.news.yahoo.com/n... ], making the job of providing security in the [i]U.S.-made[/i]-war-torn country more difficult. To exascerbate the already volatile tensions, the Pentagon has refused to permit the Iraqis to determine ([i]Iraqis are even denied a voice or participation[/i]) to whom re-construction contracts will be awarded ([i]At the same time, Dubya was calling those "nasty" allies being punished by Rummy & Wolfy, to ask them to provide troops & money!!! ha ha ha ha ha ... One hand doesn't know what the other is doing!!! What the hell are Dubya & Condi doing all day? It boggles the mind[/i]!) ... Wonder why? ... Could it be that the Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta of whores [/i]wants to pay-back their[i] corporate pimps[/i]: Halliburton, Bechtel, Unocal, Carlyle Group, et al.? ... Oh, and by the way, the Bush family is becoming fabulously rich from war-profiteering and blood-money too!!!
Isn't it time for "We the People" to contact Congress [ http://www.congress.org ] and demand a cessation to the blood-letting and require that a responsible team of experts be put in place to manage this situation ... Allowed to continue to run "[i]off the cliff[/i]", the corrupt Bush regime's greed and incompetence will simply be the cause of far more death and misery ... [i]but not for themselves or their loved ones [/i]...
[b]Sources[/b]:
"Two US soldiers killed in Mosul - [i]Two US soldiers have been killed in separate incidents in the northern Iraqi city of Mosul on Wednesday, US military sources say[/i]." on http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/mi...
"Bush Family Hits The Jackpot $$$ From Blood-Money In Iraq" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Daddy, Jeb, Neil & the Mad King George Bush's Corrupt Billions $$$ "One Family" BANK" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Bush Regime Shows Contempt For Iraq, Democracy & The Entire World" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
|
|
|
| |
| Bush Regime Shows Contempt For Iraq, Democracy & The Entire World |
| 12.10.03 (5:26 pm) [edit] |
[b]The corrupt Bush regime is comprised, frankly of[i] a cabal of petty-minded bullies [/i][/b] ... Indeed, these bombastic, crude macho-men are going to punish those who opposed their illegal and immoral incursion into Iraq-- based upon neo-con lies, deceptions & falsehoods ([i]there were no nuclear, biological & chemical WMDs posing a threat to our nation ... the mendacious 'casus belli' of the Bushies' insane war-mongering[/i]) ... The Bush regime has decided not to award any re-building contracts to those who opposed the war on Iraq: What give the Bushies the right to do so?
Today, the neo-con, neo-fascist Bushies are relishing their punishment of those who saw their neo-nazi actions for the [i]corporate-take-all [/i]rape it was intended to be, to enrich the squalid Bush family and their sordid corporate pimps: Halliburton, Bechtel, Carlyle Group, Unocal, et al.
"We the People" are simply watching an inept, arrogant and bungling cabal of neo-con thugs & goons behaving like imbecilic & blood-thirsty [i]mafiosos[/i]-- this stupidly dangerous behavior will simply result in further damaged relationships, deep resentment, and the anti-christian swindling, plundering & looting of the[i] not-so-rich[/i]-Americans and Iraqi assets & people.
[b]What about the Iraqi people's right to make decisions regarding the re-construction of their own country?[/b] [i]Clearly, the ugly, rapacious [b]bully-boy Bushies[/b] show contempt for Iraq, democracy and the entire world-- in this recent shameful action to exclude the Iraqis from directing the re-building effort[/i]. Do you really think that the Bush regime is treating [i]us, here at home, [/i]any better? ...
Yet,[i] the story is not over [/i]...
Joshua Micah Marshall's educated assessment in his excellent [i]TalkingPointsMemo[/i] on http://www.talkingpointsmemo.... is as follows:
[i][b]Reuters [/b]is reporting that the Pentagon is delaying rolling out the tenders for Iraqi reconstruction contracts -- the ones which barred bids from countries like Germany, France and Russia, and which kicked up a storm of protest around the world today.
It seems unclear, as yet, whether the controversial restrictions are the cause of the delay or whether it's something else. And if it is the cause, is this Baker's influence already being shown?
Whatever you think of Baker and his potential role in all this, he is nothing if not competent. I had lunch today with a fellow who's worked with Baker in a pretty tense international crisis and he told me there was no one in the world he'd rather have next to him in a foxhole than James Baker --- that tough, etc.
So, as I've said, I have some real questions and concerns about just what Baker's agenda is going to be as the grand dealmaker. But at least it won't be amateur hour.
And at this point, boy, that ain't no mean thing.[/i]
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Now Can We Call It Imperialism?" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Roll-out of controversial Iraq contracts delayed" on http://www.forbes.com/markets...
"War Opponents Denounce U.S. Rules on Iraq Contracts - EU Studying If Ban Violates Trade Rules" on http://www.washingtonpost.com...
|
|
|
| |
| Inconvenient Democracy: You Can Only Be Free If You've Got The OIL To Pay For It! |
| 12.10.03 (9:17 am) [edit] |
[b]Dubya's doctrine regarding "democracy" seems to be that [i]you can only be free if you've got the OIL to pay for it[/i]![/b]
Democracy is [i]inconvenient[/i] for the Bushies ... in the case of Taiwan, for example ... and, of course, there are many other examples around the world, including Zimbabwe, Niger, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Chechnya, etc. etc. etc., where governments are violating [i]human rights [/i]on a horrendous scale ... but the hypocritical neo-con, neo-fascists prop-up, support and collaborate with the most vile tyrants and dictators, so long as [b]profit is to be made for the benefit of the whorish Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] and their corporate pimps.[/b]
The corrupt Bush regime does not give a damn about "democracy"-- neither here at home, where they are [i]ramming[/i] undemocratic, fascist Patriot Acts [i]down our throats [/i]... nor abroad, where the [i]real motives[/i] of their illegal and immoral incursions into sovereign nations ([i]against the will of the entire world community[/i]) are the [i]wholesale corporate plundering and swindling [/i]of Arab nations out of their oil resources, and the hope that they can install "friendly" governments that will enable them to expand their greedy and rapacious Global Corporate Empire.
It is time for "We the People" to revolt against such corrupt, immoral and illegal adventures that result in horrific blood-shed, death, carnage and misery-- and economic looting leaving [i]not-wealthy[/i]-Americ ans, Iraqis and others, the bearers of nightmarish debts and bereft of basic services needed to maintain a civilized society.
[b]Could the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] position on Taiwan have anything to do with their corporate campaign contributors' business interests in China, pray tell? ... Hmmm ...[/b]
In "Taiwan gets a caution from Bush" on http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa...,12271,1103451,00.html : -[i] Excerpts [/i]-
[i]President George Bush said yesterday after meeting the Chinese prime minister, Wen Jiabao, that he opposes the apparent interest of Taiwan's leaders in taking steps towards independence.
It was the administration's strongest statement to date in opposition to Taiwan's plan to conduct a referendum on March 20 on whether the Taiwanese people want to demand that China withdraw hundreds of missiles aimed at Taiwan and renounce the use of force against the island[/i].
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Here We Go Again" by Pat Buchanan on http://www.antiwar.com/pat/pa...
"American Apocalypse" by Robert Jay Lifton on http://www.commondreams.org/v...
"Democracy or hypocrisy?" by Mohamed Hakki on http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/20...
|
|
|
| |
| Send Bush & Cheney on the 'Walk a Mile' Project |
| 12.09.03 (7:06 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" should demand that all future candidates for office be required to fully participate in the "Walk a Mile" Project-- [/b]([i]also the corporate robber-barons, wealthy plutocrats and the richest-of-the-rich, to whom Bush awarded massive immoral & illegal boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts-- while wiping out over 3.3 million jobs, the highest job loss since the Great Depression ... and creating the largest deficit of over $560 Billion in 2003 alone, and over $1.9 Trillion in budget deficits from 2000-2004, the largest in our nation's history[/i]).
The callous, arrogant & corrupt Bush and Cheney (neo-con [i]corporate whores[/i]) should be the [i][b]first[/b][/i] to go ... as their so-called "[i]compassion[/i] (sic)" for their neo-fascist [i]corporate pimps [/i]needs a re-adjustment into [i]real compassion[/i] for [b]those in need [/b]...
Read about the [b]"Walk a Mile"[/b] Project on ... http://www.oregonlive.com/new...
[b]Officials get taste of how lower income live:[/b]
[b]The "Walk a Mile" project challenges community leaders to live on a food stamp budget for a month! [/b] http://www.oregonlive.com/new...
|
|
|
| |
| What The Hell Are We Trying To Achieve? |
| 12.09.03 (4:53 pm) [edit] |
[b]What the hell are we trying to achieve in Iraq?[/b]
[b]The neo-con, neo-fascist Bushies [/b]are truly running around in a[i] [i]panic-stricken [/i]modus operandi [/i]... They've got a [b]Tiger By The Tail [/b]of their own making, and they don't have a plan-- they don't have a clue-- they are[i] winging-it [/i]day-in-and-day-out as the Death Toll rises with no end in sight ...
Initially, the war on Iraq was waged [i]in order to [/i] disarm Saddam Hussein of massive nuclear, chemical and biological WMDs ([i]we were misled by the neo-cons, as most intelligence and weapons experts agree that Iraq WMDs were destroyed in the 1990s inspection process[/i]) -- otherwise we'd all be blown to smitherings ([i]remember the invocation of mushroom clouds wiping out millions of us at any moment[/i]) ... [i][b]But there are no WMDs and they posed no threat to the USA [/b][/i]...
Next, we were [i]supposed to [/i]topple Saddam Hussein, the ruthless dictator ([i]who was loved by Daddy Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the neo-cons who sold him his armaments and WMDs stash in the 1980s[/i]) ... He's got to be ousted, they tell us, because he is buddies with Al Qaida ...[i] [b]But there is no link ([i]at least there WAS no link-- now the entire Arab world is rallying to the side of the resistance fighters in Iraq[/i]) between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden or Al Qaida who were responsible for 9/11 (not Saddam)[/b][/i] ...
Now, the U.S.A. is [i]supposed to[/i] impose the neo-con BushWorldView of "democracy" ([i]whatever the hell that is[/i]) on Iraq ... [i][b]But the Iraqi people (over 80% in the most recent poll) don't want us there and are not supportive of the Bush Doctrine of Corporate Rape All [/b][/i]...
[b]So, what the hell are we trying to achieve now? [i]Read on [/i][/b]...
[b]Sure, it worked so well in The 'Nam[/b]
[b]All reports are that the American occupation of Iraq is increasingly using strategies of maximum aggression [/b]to quell the violent rebellion it faces. As part of this, according to the New Yorker's Seymour Hersh, the Bush Administration has authorized "[i]a major escalation of the Special Forces covert war in Iraq[/i]," sending Delta Force, Navy Seals and CIA paramilitary agents out to preemptively capture or assassinate alleged guerrillas. “The only way we can win is to go unconventional. We’re going to have to play their game. Guerrilla versus guerrilla. Terrorism versus terrorism. We’ve got to scare the Iraqis into submission," said one American advisor to the occupation.
[b]Shouldn't "We the People" be asking the following question:-- Will this "[i]win[/i]" by massacring tens of thousands more people in Iraq actually achieve our goal ... [i]whatever the hell that is[/i]?[/b]
[b]Sources[/b]:
"Annals of National Security: MOVING TARGETS, Will the counter-insurgency plan in Iraq repeat the mistakes of Vietnam?", by Seymour M. Hersh, The New Yorker, on http://www.newyorker.com/fact...
AlterNet on http://www.alternet.org
|
|
|
| |
| Dubya's Corporate Cronies Think Paying Taxes Is For 'Suckers' |
| 12.09.03 (9:21 am) [edit] |
[b]Dubya's rapacious, reckless and greedy corporate cronies think that paying taxes is for '[i]suckers[/i]'[/b]. The corrupt Bush regime is attempting ([i]not very successfully[/i]) to deceive us yet again with more cynical, neo-orwellian "[i]happy talk[/i]" ... not only about their bloody fiasco in Iraq, where more U.S. Soldiers were killed today in their [i]out-of-control [/i]bloody querrilla quagmire-- but also with regards to their [i]train-wreck [/i]of an economy that they've handed over [i]lock-stock-and-barrel [/i]to corporate rapists.
"[b]Paying Taxes Is For Suckers[/b]" by [i]Lee Drutman[/i], the Communications Director for [i][b]Citizen Works [/b][/i][ http://www.citizenworks.org/ ] on http://tompaine.com/feature2.... :
How is it possible that individual Americans shoulder a disproportionately large part of the overall tax burden while the portion paid by corporations is at its second lowest level in U.S. history? Complexity, plain and simple. [b]By cooking up tax shelter concoctions that are difficult to understand[/b], Michigan Senator Carl Levin says, corporations are able to “escape scrutiny and public ire.” Exact calculations of how much corporate tax shelters cost the [b]U.S. Treasury are hard to come by, but estimates put the loss of tax revenue as high as $18 billion a year[/b].
Though corporations trying to avoid taxes is an old story, what is new is the rise of so-called "tax products"—essentially schemes designed by morally-challenged tax professionals who then peddle them aggressively to corporations looking for an extra tax savings boost.
The ranking Democrat on a panel investigating tax havens, Levin described the tax shelter business in a recent hearing: "The tax shelter industry of today is fundamentally different than it was a few years ago. Instead of individuals and corporations going to their accountant or lawyer and asking for tax advice, the engine driving the tax shelter industry today is the effort of a horde of tax advisors cooking up one complex scheme after another. . . and then using elaborate marketing schemes to peddle these products across the country."
[b]KPMG Lightens Its Load [/b]
The dense report that Levin's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations put out a few weeks ago does not make for light reading. It explores, in painstaking detail, how just one firm, KPMG, set up four tax shelters that cost the U.S. Treasury $1.4 billion with the help of a cadre of lawyers, bankers and financial professionals. These schemes—whose playful names (BLIPs, FLIPs, OPIS and SC2) belie their tax-avoiding prowess—helped KPMG pull in $124 million from 350 clients.
And though the devil may indeed be in the details, when it comes to corporate tax shelters, the devil is pretty much everywhere else, too. What's not complicated to see is that tax shelters are increasingly big business for accounting firms, lawyers and financial professionals. And, as the hearings made clear, the IRS is woefully ill-equipped to fight back, trying to stop a $18 billion leak (the estimated annual cost of tax shelters to the U.S. Treasury) with a weak $1,000 plug (the IRS fine for tax shelter promoters). Worse, some of these schemes are perfectly legal abuses of an incredibly complicated tax code rife with special exceptions and loopholes.
Still, the most disturbing trend may be the aggressive way that tax professionals are now peddling these schemes. One e-mail, dug up in the year-long investigation that produced the report, reveals the importance of aggressive marketing campaigns to push these products: "I want to personally thank everyone for their efforts during the approval process of this strategy," reads the e-mail. "It was completed very quickly and everyone demonstrated true teamwork. Thank you! Now let's SELL, SELL, SELL!!"
"These are the tactics you might expect out of a boiler-room operation selling phony land deals," Levin said in a recent speech. "But here they are coming from people in our top professions."
At the hearings, KPMG executives attempted to distance themselves from the tax schemes under heated questioning. They said they had gotten out of the tax shelter business, and besides, those schemes were primarily investment strategies. Of course, KPMG could pass these schemes off as legit because they were lent legitimacy by respected investment firms, like Presidio Advisors (which took a percentage of all tax savings), by respected law firms like Brown & Wood (which made more than $12 million providing 250 opinion letters at $50,000 a pop), and even by respected banks like Deutsche Bank and Hypo-und Vereinsbank (which together made more than $5 billion helping clients finance the tax shelters.
Indeed, as the report concludes: "Dubious tax shelters are no longer the province of shady fly-by-night companies with limited resources. They are now big business, assigned to talented professionals at the top of their fields and able to draw upon vast resources and reputations of the country's largest accounting firms, law firms, investment advisory firms, and banks." According to a recent GAO report, an estimated 6,400 individuals and corporations have bought tax shelter "products" from more than 300 firms.
[b]Toothless Penalties [/b]
So how are all these professionals getting away with this? Well, to start, the fine for tax shelter promoters is a measly $1,000 per offense. Compare that to the $124 million KPMG earned from just four shelters, and you can see why perhaps a $1,000 fine might not be a deterrent.
And that's when the IRS even catches the promoters. Right now, the IRS's main detection weapons are weakly enforced laws that require tax professionals to register tax products. However, asking tax professionals to tell the IRS when they are breaking the law does not appear to work that well. For example, of KMPG's 500 active tax products, exactly zero are registered.
In the larger context, tax shelters are one part of a massive effort by corporations to lower their tax bills, an effort that has been quite successful in recent years. In 2003, for example, corporate tax revenues fell to only 7.4 percent of federal tax receipts, the second-lowest level on record. (In the 1940s, corporations contributed almost half of federal taxes.) And though corporations are technically taxed at 35 percent, large corporations on average pay about half that. All this while the federal deficit sinks deeper into the red and government dollars dry up for education, health care and other essential social programs. Because abusive tax shelters are pursued so brazenly, and as a form of tax evasion they are among the most egregious, they’re a good place to start cracking down. Still, righting the tax shelter ship is not going to be easy. The federal government needs to make a serious effort to give the IRS the tools and resources it needs. One obvious place to start, however, would be to hike the fines for tax shelter promoters. The government also needs to devote more resources to detecting tax shelters, working with federal bank regulators and the Department of Justice. Meanwhile, accounting regulators need to start cracking down on accounting firms, who earn billions each year by selling tax products. These firms are supposed to guarantee honest financial statements, not abet tax shelter abuse.
Finally, the rules on what counts as an illegal tax shelter need to be tightened. Many of the tax schemes peddled these days skirt the boundaries of legality by exploiting loopholes for purposes never intended. Though they are sometimes technically legal, the IRS can crack down using what is known as the "economic substance" doctrine, which basically disallows transactions that are done purely for tax purposes and have no legitimate economic substance. Strengthening this "economic substance" doctrine is an important way to battle tax shelter abuse.
At stake are basic issues of economic justice and tax fairness. There is simply no justification why honest, working-class taxpayers should have to shoulder more of the burden while greedy corporations and their avaricious accountants, lawyers and financial professionals are FLIPing and BLIPing their way to new heights of tax trickery.
[b]Other readings[/b]:
"HAPPY DAYS [for the economy]", The New Yorker, on http://newyorker.com/talk/con... - [i]Excerpt [/i]-
[i]Things are looking up—according to George W. Bush and the Times, anyway. Last Tuesday, the paper led its front page with this sunny triple-decker: “manufacturing at highest level in two decades; hiring outlook is upbeat; stocks at 18-month peak on run of positive data—bush optimistic.” The headline’s main claim, however, was inaccurate. It misinterpreted an economic indicator that is designed to gauge whether factories are churning out more or less stuff than they did last month, not absolute levels of production. The most reliable measure of how manufacturing is doing is the Federal Reserve’s index of industrial production, which in October was 112.7, compared with a high of 118.4 in June of 2000. The November figure comes out next week. A six-point jump isn’t impossible, but it would be virtually unprecedented.
What we can be sure of is that most manufacturing companies are still operating well below capacity, and that millions of manufacturing jobs have been lost. In October, 73.5 per cent of plants and equipment were in active use. Three years ago, more than eighty per cent were. When President Bush took office, about 17.1 million Americans worked in factories; today, 14.5 million do. Last month, another seventeen thousand manufacturing jobs disappeared. Manufacturing employment has now fallen for forty straight months[/i]."
"ECONOMY: No Work For You", Center for American Progress, on http://www.americanprogress.o...%7BE9245FE4-9A2B-43C7-A52 1-5D6FF2E06E03%7D/031208.HTM#3 - [i]Excerpt [/i]-
[i]The employment numbers announced Friday showed the job sector is growing weakly, as "the nation's employers displayed an unexpected reluctance...to hire more workers." The NYT reports, "the work force grew by only 57,000 jobs last month...only a third of what most forecasters had projected." Said economist Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services Inc., the news "is like getting just the Christmas present you wanted, but two sizes too small." With new entries into the job market, economists say 200,000 to 300,000 new jobs have to be added each month "to significantly lower the unemployment rate and sustain a labor market recovery." Instead of hiring new workers, employers are "trying to squeeze every ounce they can from their existing employees," according to economist Nariman Bahravesh. Overtime is up (though workers might not get compensated for it in the future if the Bush Administration gets its way), as is the use of temporary employees (who get reduced benefits), while wages are rising more slowly than the rate of inflation. [/i]
|
|
|
| |
| Bush Family Hits The Jackpot $$$ From Blood-Money In Iraq |
| 12.09.03 (7:45 am) [edit] |
[b]The corrupt Bush family has wasted no time in exploiting their opportunities to cash-in on the [i]war-profits [/i]in Iraq[/b]. War-profiteering used to be considered a disgusting, despicable and illegal (during WW2) form of exploitation of the lost and damaged lives of other human beings-- but the Bushies are dishonorable blood-suckers, and are oblivious to the death and misery of others--
Enlightened leaders in modern times recognized that war is a terrible last resort ([i]1st option lusted after by the insane neo-con "crazies" who want "pre-emptive" wars to enrich themselves[/i]) only to be waged in the most dire circumstances if a nation is truly threatened ([i]Iraq did not pose a threat to the USA[/i]) ... and therefore, that profiteers ([i]vultures[/i]) should not enrich themselves off the blood of their countrymen and the carnage of human beings ([i]not the neo-fascist Bushies who eat the flesh and swill the blood of those they are responsible for killing[/i]).
In "Blood Kin", Chris Floyd describes the ruthless exploitation of the sordid & squalid Bush family swindles on http://www.sptimes.ru/archive... : - [i]Excerpt [/i]-
"Neil has dipped his silver spoon into the reconstruction gravy being ladled out by his brother George, the White House warlord. Neil is now being paid a fat annual fee to "help companies secure contracts in Iraq," the Financial Times reports.
Bush is co-chairman of a pork funnel called Crest Investment Corporation. His partner, Syrian-American businessman Jamal Daniel, is wired into the chief private conduit of war profits, New Bridge Strategies, a lobbying firm packed with Bush family retainers, many of whom left government service this spring to leap into the Iraq money pit. As long as Brother George keeps tossing cannon fodder into the Iraqi cauldron, Brother Neil will keep padding his bulging Bush wallet.
Neil's sordid saga exemplifies the Bush clan's prime "family value": rake it in from all sides, blood and honor be damned."
[b]"We the People" are witness to the ugliest type of rapacious [i]blood-letting and war-profiteering [/i]seen in modern times, as the neo-nazi Bush family and their neo-fascist [i]corporate-take-all [/i]cronies hit the jackpot $$$ from blood-money they steal in Iraq[/b].
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Daddy, Jeb, Neil & the Mad King George Bush's Corrupt Billions $$$ "One Family" BANK" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"Consultant On Iraq Contracts Employed President's Brother" on http://www.rense.com/general4...
"The Bushes and the Carlyle Group" on http://www.bushwatch.com/bush...
|
|
|
| |
| What Can We Believe? |
| 12.08.03 (3:04 pm) [edit] |
"The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. Ignorance may deride it. But in the end, there it is." - [i]Winston Churchill[/i]
"Political language. . . is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind." - [i]George Orwell [/i]
"The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie. One word of truth outweighs the world." - [i]Alexander Solzhenitsyn [/i]
[b]"We the People" are faced with a real dilemma [/b]... What can we believe? ... We [i]want[/i] to believe that that our government is honest with us-- this is critical for the well-being of our democracy and the health of our nation. Yet, our government is not honest with us.
Once we are lied to by a person or a regime, it is not easy-- in fact, it is foolish to believe them again, without uncontravertable proof. This breach of trust ... the betrayal of trust, [i](this sacred trust between a leader and the nation)[/i], by the corrupt Bush regime is at the heart of many conscientious citizens profound concerns about what we are told is happening both here at home and abroad.
Many indications are that the neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] economic forecasts are built upon a "house of cards" that will fall apart ... the Bushies hope to stretch the "[i]good news[/i] (sic)" out until after the 2004 elections ... however, the tax cuts affecting the Middle Class are destined to expire in 2005, while those awarded to the corporations and the richest 5% plutocrats don't expire.
Furthermore, on the war-front, the reports and glad tidings propagated by the neo-con Bush regime are all too frequently proven wrong, inaccurate or worse, the next day ... inexcusable when the lives of our U.S. Soldiers, Coalition Forces and innocent Afghanistani and Iraqi people are placed in harm's way.
[b]A stark and moving example of this horrific dilemma [/b]is outlined eloquently by Jim Lobe in "Lessons of a bloody Sunday in Samarra" on http://www.atimes.com/atimes/... :
[b]WASHINGTON[/b] - [b]On one point, all sources appear to agree[/b]: [i]what happened in the northern Sunni town of Samarra two Sundays ago could tell us a great deal about whether United States forces are likely to succeed or fail in pacifying and stabilizing Iraq[/i].
That there was a three-hour battle between US soldiers and Iraqis is also not in question. The problem is that everything else about events is. The lack of agreement about the "Battle of Samarra", as well its obvious importance in gauging how the occupation is going, has already provoked a flurry of analysis both in the mainstream media and on Internet websites.
The military at first claimed US forces had killed no less than 46 of the paramilitary Fedayeen, identifiable, apparently, from their black uniforms and checkered khafiyas, or head scarves. That toll rose to 54 within hours after debriefings of each unit.
Press officers claimed that the battle began when two convoys entering the city from opposite sides were ambushed by more than 60 Fedayeen who lay in wait for them at either end of the city. The convoys, which included Bradley fighting vehicles and Abrams tanks, were delivering new dinars to a bank located in the center of town, and the fighting raged through the streets and alleys of the city all the way in and all the way out.
Eleven prisoners were taken, they insisted, while, on the US side, only five of the 100 soldiers involved in the battle were wounded. US military officers were understandably jubilant, claiming a "significant victory" - indeed, in terms of body counts, probably the most significant since President George W Bush announced an end to major hostilities in Iraq on May 1.
"They got whacked, and won't try that again," a senior military official at the Pentagon told the New York Times triumphantly, or, as the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine General Peter Pace, told a North Atlantic Treaty Organization meeting in Brussels, "They attacked, and they were killed. I think it will be instructive to them."
War enthusiasts back home, meanwhile, told reporters that the battle demonstrated the desperation of the guerrillas. The fact that so many were involved in what was so clearly intended to be a bank heist showed they were running short of money to fund the resistance, and possibly of men, too.
Other analysts who accepted the basic outlines of the military's version of events came to more worrisome conclusions: the number and mobility the guerrillas showed in the fighting suggested they had reached a new level of organization, sophistication and recruitment, while their uniforms bespoke a growing confidence, and their apparent knowledge of when and how the money was to be delivered meant that their intelligence remains light years ahead of the occupation's.
But when reporters began swarming to Samarra - some roused from their beds by eager military press officers - the scene was not as they had expected. Nor were the accounts of the townspeople, and, after a day of interviews, an entirely different picture of the Sunday battle emerged.
Doctors and hospital staff reported only eight Iraqi dead, including one or two elderly pilgrims from Iran, a child, a mentally disabled man who was sitting in a taxi, and a woman leaving the drug factory where she worked. The hospital said that it had treated a total of 54 people for wounds.
Indeed, townspeople interviewed by name described the "battle" more as indiscriminate firing from the tanks and other armored vehicles, and random shooting by US soldiers, much of it in the densely populated city center, while "dozens of guerrillas" moved around the city taking pot shots at the US troops at will.
"Luckily we evacuated the kindergarten five minutes before we came under attack," said Ibrahim Jassim, a guard interviewed by the London Guardian. "Why did they attack randomly? Why did they shoot a kindergarten with shells?"
Worse, according to accounts provided by some sources to the Washington Post, the Iraqi resistance grew larger as men rushed home to get their firearms to join in the fighting. The military explained the discrepancy in the body counts by suggesting that the guerrillas' bodies had been carried away and secretly buried by their comrades, an assertion for which reporters there could find no evidence,either at the city cemetery or anywhere else.
Justin Raimondo, a writer at antiwar.com, a website that opposes the occupation, also did a quick calculation, suggesting that the military's explanation did not add up. "We are told that a total of 60 insurgents ambushed those convoys, but if US troops killed 54 and captured 11, that leaves five insurgents to carry away the dead."
Nonetheless, General Mark Kimmit, the deputy director for operations in Iraq, insisted that the 54 Iraqi guerrillas killed was accurate, although he also confirmed that, instead of 11 Fedayeen captured, only one was in fact in US custody.
Of course, the disparity between the two accounts could be attributed to the legendary "fog of war". But the gap was so large that the media were already raising questions about that dreaded Vietnam-era expression, "credibility", particularly, as pointed out by the Los Angeles Times, and Tom Engelhardt of tomdispatch.com, with respect to the inflated body counts that came to encapsulate the mendacity of the "Five O'Clock Follies in Saigon", as the daily briefings during the Vietnam War were called.
Indeed, as if on cue, the Times reported last week that "US military officials, in their regular news briefings in Iraq, have quietly begun reporting insurgent 'KIA', or killed in action, after months of declining to detail the other side's losses."
More worrisome perhaps for the occupation's prospects, however, was what the townspeople told reporters about both the battle and their general assessment of the occupiers. "Were the French happy under the Nazis?" the US-appointed police chief in Samarra asked the Financial Times after the battle. "It is the same thing here."
Another policeman found the military's contentions about guerrilla uniforms incomprehensible. "These are just lies." he told Knight-Ridder. "Everyone who was wearing a kafiyeh was to them a Fedayeen. This is ridiculous." Others interviewed by reporters had much harsher words and vowed revenge for however many people were killed and injured in the fighting.
It seemed quite a contrast from what greeted US soldiers when they first arrived in the city, as noted by Raimondo, who dug out the following account from April. "As soon as soldiers with the brigade's Infantry Battalion had cleared the Ba'athist compound, taking nine men into custody as possible regime sympathizers, [Colonel Fred] Rudesheim found himself to be a popular man in Samarra. All day long, men came, each offering information," the Denver Post reported.
Now, eight months later, Rudesheim, who has presided over Samarra ever since, insisted the townspeople were still with him. "What we hear is that the people of Samarra are fed up [with the guerrillas]," he told reporters.
SFTT.org, a military website quoted in www.warincontext.org and tomdispatch.com, featured a message from an anonymous US "combat leader" who claims to have been in the Samarra ambush. He complained that Rudesheim "is not trained in counter-Insurgency, and my soldiers are taking the heat".
"[b]We drive around in convoys, blast the hell out of the area, break down doors and search buildings; but the guerillas continue to attacks [sic] us. It does not take a [General] George Patton to see we are using the wrong tactics against these people[/b]."
|
|
|
| |
| British Intelligence Sources Distance Themselves From Un-Proven WMDs Claim |
| 12.08.03 (11:36 am) [edit] |
[b]The Blair government's intelligence sources in Great Britain are distancing themselves from the [i]un-proven claims [/i]regarding WMDs, by an unreliable source[/b], Lt Col Al-Dabbagh ... part of the liar and embezzler Ahmed Chalabi's gang of thugs & goons who want to take over Iraq ... and lied to the U.S. and the entire world in order to achieve their own aims to empower and enrich themselves, manipulating America as a mercenary force ... (with the [i]collaboration of the criminal neo-cons in the Bush regime [/i]who want to rape Iraq of their OIL & Businesses) ... Remember, the Bushies all told us that the source of the "[i]sexed-up[/i]" [i]45-minute WMDs[/i] was British Intelligence ... The CIA remains skeptical as to the reliability of this claim coming from a source with a vested interest in propping-up and profitting from his connections with the squalid thief Ahmed Chalabi.
Lt. Col Al-Dabbagh who is being cheered-on by the neo-con, neo-fascist Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters-- is employed by the Iraqi Governing Counsel (IGC) controlled by the swindler and discredited Chalabi ([i]disliked by the Iraqi people[/i]) ... These mendacious Iraqi "[i]exiles[/i]" are in the pocket of the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i], all of whom are plundering and looting the U.S.A. & Iraq for all we're collectively worth ... Is it any coincidence that shortly following meetings with Bush's [i]liars and spin-meisters [/i]extraordinaires, Rice and Rumsfeld, that suddenly an announcement is made designed to prop-up the Mad King George ... [i]Connect the Dots [/i]... "Boy in the Plastic Bubble" ... Plastic Turkeys ... and now, Plastic WMDs???
[b]... I'd check to make sure that newly discovered WMDs aren't made by the same company that manufactured the phony turkey prop used by Dubya last Thanksgiving ... Are "We the People" going to fall for this novel neo-con scam? ...[/b]
Refer to "Iraqi[i] says [/i]he was source for 45-minute claim" on http://politics.guardian.co.u...,12956,1102265,00.html :
An Iraqi officer has claimed he warned British intelligence about Saddam's Hussain's weapons of mass destruction programme.
The officer, identified only as Lieutenant Colonel Al-Dabbagh and said to be head of a frontline air defence unit in the western desert, told the Sunday Telegraph he warned MI6 that Iraqi forces could use chemical or biological weapons on the battlefield against invading forces in less than 45 minutes.
He claimed that the only reason the weapons were not used was because most of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam.
Intelligence officials said yesterday that they could not comment on the story. However, [b]Whitehall sources distanced themselves from Lt Col Al-Dabbagh's claims[/b], which do not chime with evidence that was presented to the Hutton inquiry.
Lt Col Al-Dabbagh[i] said [/i]he spied for a[i][b] London-based exile group[/b][/i], the Iraqi National Accord.
It is thought that he will not be the last officer to claim to be the source of the 45-minute claim.
Sir Richard Dearlove, head of MI6, told the Hutton inquiry that the information contained in the dossier relating to the 45-minute claim came from a single "established and reliable" source serving as a senior officer in the Iraqi army.
But Brian Jones, a former senior member of the Defence Intelligence Staff, said MI6's informant on the 45-minute claim was a secondary source.
On Friday, Sir Rodric Braithwaite, former chairman of Whitehall's joint intelligence committee, attacked the way the dossier warned that Saddam could "deploy" weapons of mass destruction with 45 minutes. It spoke of an "imminent" or "current" threat, he said, pointing out that the press and the public came to alarming conclusions. [[i]Short-range ... they could not have reached beyond a maximum range of 180 miles[/i].]
He added: "This illustrates an iron law about the way drafting committees work." The drafters, he said, lost sight of what words meant to the ordinary reader.
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"NO 10 SILENT ON IRAQ DOSSIERCLAIM" on http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/...
"How the 45-minute claim got from Baghdad to No 10" on http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ne...
"Only eight Iraqi weapons scientists remain in U.S. intelligence hands; all involved with former biological programs" on http://www.nola.com/iraq/inde...
"MOVING TARGETS" by Seymour M. Hersh on http://www.newyorker.com/fact...
[b]Disclaimer[/b]: Would tons of WMDs posing an imminent threat to the U.S.A. have been so easily [i]whisked away[/i]? ... Any so-called WMDs obtained by Saddam Hussein [i]posed no threat to the U.S.A.[/i] as dishonestly claimed by the corrupt neo-con Bush liars.
|
|
|
| |
| Where Are The Jobs? |
| 12.08.03 (10:02 am) [edit] |
[b]The Bush/Cheney Inc.[i] junta's [/i]premature ejaculations of "Mission Accomplished", [/b]both: on 1st May in their embarrassing, bombastic buffoonery aboard the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln, [i]and now [/i]regarding the economy -- are both becoming obscenely sour, tinny and ([i]un[/i])funny jokes.
[b]Where are the jobs?[/b]
The Democrat's policies created over 22,000,000 jobs in eight years during the Clinton administration ... The Mad King George's insane neo-feudal policies have destroyed 3,000,000 jobs in 3 years-- the highest job loss since the Great Depression. Meanwhile, the [i]corporate-take-all [/i]Bush regime [i]spends-like-drunken-sa ilors [/i]on immoral and illegal boondoggles, tax loophooles & tax cuts for corporations, their hyper-rich campaign contributors and the [i]richest-of-the-rich [/i]plutocrats-- resulting in the highest deficits and debts in our nation's history. Bush has run-up a $560 Billion deficit in 2003 alone, and it looks like this will amount to over $1.9 Trillion for his 2000-2004 regime: and, "We the People" HAVE NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT ... as Bush's reckless spending was not invested in our people, our infrastructure and our nation. [i]The rich are getting richer, and the rest of us are getting poorer[/i].
The neo-fascist Bushies are again lying ([i]as they always do[/i]) by telling us how great the economy is, as [b]we are headed off a cliff [/b]... It might be great if you are hyper-rich ... It might be great if you are a corporate swindler ... It might be great if you have a good job and don't know what the hell is going on ... But it isn't great if you are out of work, middle-class, lower-income, poor and/or are struggling ... Now we're confronted with the arrogant and ignorant neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters who callously smirk [i]So What If Some People Are Out Of Work[/i]? Is that really the type of answer that an intelligent person of conscience is willing to accept? Of course not.
[b]Tragically it seems that the profits from the increase in growth and productivity are bypassing "We the People", are [i]ending-up funneled [/i]into the big bulging pockets of the corporate executives, rich plutocrats and greedy campaign contributors ... and, let's not forget the war-profiteers in the Bush/Cheney Inc. Family[/b].
[b]Sources[/b]:
"[b]Marginal rise in US employment in November[/b]" on http://www.wsws.org/articles/... - [i]Excerpt[/i] -
[i]The BLS report, which described the unemployment rate and number of unemployed persons (8.7 million) as “essentially unchanged” and “down slightly from midyear,” came as a disappointment to analysts. In the days leading up to the release of the November figures, economists had predicted an increase of 120,000 to 150,000 jobs, while some on Wall Street had forecast a growth of 200,000 or more. The stock market declined Friday morning on the news.
At the same time as productivity is soaring, workers’ wages are seeing next to no improvement. Average hourly earnings rose 0.1 percent in November to $15.46. Hourly earnings over the last 12 months are up only 2.1 percent, the slowest annual growth in 16 years. [The obese salaries of the corporate top-dogs & fat-cats, on the other hand, is soaring.][/i]
"[b]Where Are the Jobs[/b]?" on http://www.progressive.org/we... - [i]Excerpt[/i] -
[i]Though the unemployment rate dipped by one-tenth of a percentage point to 5.9 percent, the figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics on Friday were anything but encouraging. After two years of so-called recovery, the economy in November added only 57,000 jobs, far fewer than what is necessary to make up for the number of new people entering the job market, much less to make a serious dent in the unemployment figures.
Unique in the annals of U.S. capitalism over the past six decades, the Bush recovery has not regained jobs.
"Since the recession ended twenty-four months ago in November 2001, 726,000 jobs have disappeared," says the Economic Policy Institute. "This is the first time since monthly job statistics began in 1939 that there has not been positive growth in jobs for two years after a recession ended."
In this job-loss recovery, the manufacturing sector--traditionally with the highest-paid, most unionized jobs--has taken the biggest hit, losing 2.4 million jobs. "In the last two years, manufacturing employment declined by $1.3 trillion, or 9.1 percent," the Economic Policy Institute notes. "That record is far worse than the first two years following any previous recession."
Manufacturing jobs have declined for an astonishing 40 months in a row.[/i]
"[b]Health Care Costs Continue Double Digit Increase - Employees bearing more of the costs[/b]" on http://www.commondreams.org/h... - [i]Excerpt[/i] -
[i]Facing a fourth year of double-digit premium hikes, companies have been getting tough this year, pushing a lot more of those costs back onto their employees in the form of higher co-payments and other cost-sharing arrangements. Recognizing the limitations of those tactics, the survey found employers looking to longer-term solutions and possible government intervention to head off the unrelenting increases.
Many employers and health experts believe that requiring employees to pick up more of their health care tab and pay more for more expensive plans makes them more cost-sensitive and conscientious health care consumers.[/i]
|
|
|
| |
| EVEN Neo-Fascist Newt Gingrich Tells The Bushies To Clean-Up Their Iraqi Fiasco |
| 12.07.03 (8:42 pm) [edit] |
[b]EVEN the neo-con, neo-fascist Newt [i]'Contract-[u]ON[/u]-Am erica' [/i]Gingrich [/b]appeared today on "Meet the Press" where he told the Bushies to clean-up their bloody fiasco in Iraq. Gingrich admitted that the in-fighting ([i]demonstrating that the weak-minded & incompetent puppet Dubya can't control & manage his gang of thugs & goons in the White House & Pentagon[/i]) within the corrupt Bush regime is disastrous and admonished them to fix this problem-- and fix it[i] toute suite[/i].
Newt Gin[i]grinch[/i] went on to spout his ugly neo-fascist screed about how wonderful it will be ([i]for whom[/i]?) when the neo-cons and corporate interests have swindled Americans out of social security, overtime pay, and the very, very few social safety nets left remaining ... that the Bushies have not as yet undone (although they have already slashed social programs for the elderly, children, poor and vulnerable ... and placed a back-breaking burden on the Middle-Class & Lower-Income Workers via immoral and anti-christian boondoggles, tax loopholes and tax cuts for the corporations and richest plutocrats ... and the most massive debts[i] to enrich their corporate cronies[/i] in our nation's history) ... but the corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] intends to turn the U.S.A. into a 3rd world neo-slave state, unless "We the People" put a stop to their blood-thirsty, barbaric and rapacious insanity here at home and abroad.
It is worthwhile to[i] take the time [/i]to study the platforms put forward by the Democratic candidates who offer more enlightened visions ([i]than the corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc.'s corporate-take-all rape of America & insane perpetual warmongering[/i]) with substantive programs and initiatives more beneficial to our citizens, as well as a positive role in the world community:
Howard Dean's "Dean For America" on http://www.deanforamerica.com...
John Kerry's "John Kerry For President" on http://www.johnkerry.com/
Dick Gephardt's "Dick Gephardt For President" on http://www.dickgephardt2004.c...*
Wesley Clark's "General Wesley Clark For President" on http://www.clark04.com/
Also, there are [i]web-sites [/i]for the remaining candidates ... but those[i] listed above [/i]are the most likely prospective candidates.
[b]Sources[/b]:
"[i]Meet the Press[/i]" on Sunday, 7th December 2003
In "[i]Dissent in the Bunker [/i]: Newt Gingrich, a quiet Rumsfeld confidant, thinks the U.S. went ‘off a cliff’ in Iraq. A NEWSWEEK exclusive" on http://www.msnbc.com/news/100... :
[b]The military has been hitting hard lately in Iraq, using overwhelming firepower to kill the enemy in operations with videogame names like Iron Hammer and Ivy Cyclone II. But behind the scenes, some military experts, including high-ranking officers in U.S. Special Forces (Army Green Berets, Navy SEALs and the like), are beginning to complain that America’s strategy in Iraq is wrongheaded[/b].
“THIS IS WHAT Westmoreland was doing in Vietnam,” says a top Special Forces commander, referring to the firepower-heavy tactics favored by the military’s senior commander in Vietnam, Gen. William Westmoreland, who lost sight of America’s essential mission in that lost war: winning the hearts and minds of the people.
One center of private concerns with America’s Iraq strategy is the Defense Policy Board, a collection of outside experts—mostly heavyweight conservatives—who regularly consult with Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Disquiet in this quarter is particularly significant, since the DPB pushed from the outset for the invasion of Iraq. Last week one of the more colorful and outspoken members of the group, former House speaker Newt Gingrich, went public with his worries and ideas in an interview with NEWSWEEK. He was careful to say that he does not speak about the board’s deliberations “on or off the record,” but he proceeded to hold forth in his insightful, if mildly bombastic, way about the shortcomings of administration policy in Iraq.
Sitting in his office in downtown Washington, Gingrich searched on his computer for the Web site of the Coalition Provisional Authority, set up in Baghdad to oversee the reconstruction and democratization of Iraq. “I’m told over there that CPA stands for ‘Can’t Produce Anything’,” says Gingrich. “Home page of the New Iraq,” he quotes. Then: “The opening quote is, of course, by [CPA chief Paul] Bremer. Next quote is by Bush. Next quote is by U.S. Ambassador Steve Mann.” He scrolls down. “Now this is a big breakthrough. They do have the new Iraqi ambassador to the U.S. On the front page. That is a breakthrough,” he repeats, adding, sotto voce, “I have been beating the crap out of them for two weeks on this.” His basic point: where are the Iraqi faces in the New Iraq? “Americans can’t win in Iraq,” he says. “Only Iraqis can win in Iraq.”
Gingrich argues that the administration has been putting far too much emphasis on a military solution and slighting the political element. “The real key here is not how many enemy do I kill. The real key is how many allies do I grow,” he says. “And that is a very important metric that they just don’t get.” He contends that the civilian-run CPA is fairly isolated and powerless, hunkered down inside its bunker in Baghdad. The military has the money and the daily contact with the locals. But it’s using the same tactics in a guerrilla struggle that led to defeat in Vietnam.
“The Army’s reaction to Vietnam was not to think about it,” he says. Rather than absorb the lessons of counterinsurgency, Gingrich says, the Army adopted “a deliberate strategy of amnesia because people didn’t want to ever do it again.” The Army rebuilt a superb fighting force for waging a conventional war. “I am very proud of what [Operation Iraqi Freedom commander Gen.] Tommy Franks did—up to the moment of deciding how to transfer power to the Iraqis. Then,” said Gingrich, “we go off a cliff.”
In essence, the Americans never did transfer power. They disbanded the Iraqi Army and the government, realized that was a mistake, and quickly tried to cobble together an Iraqi police force and military. But the Iraqis in uniform today are seen by too many Iraqi citizens as American collaborators. Gingrich faults the Americans for not quickly establishing some sort of Iraqi government, however imperfect. “The idea that we are going to have a corruption-free, pristine, League of Women Voters government in Iraq on Tuesday is beyond naivete,” he scoffs. “It is a self-destructive fantasy.” (The White House insists that it is paying close attention to local politics and has speeded up the timetable to turn over power to the Iraqis.)
The rumor mill in the Pentagon suggests that Bush’s “exit strategy” is to get American troops coming home in waves by next November’s election. Obliquely, Gingrich indicates that would be a huge mistake. The guerrillas cannot be allowed to believe that they only have to outlast the Americans to win. “The only exit strategy is victory,” Gingrich says. But not by brute American force. “We are not the enforcers. We are the reinforcers,” says Gingrich. “The distinction between these two words is central to the next year in Iraq.” Gingrich’s voice rang with his customary certainty. Hard to know if Rumsfeld and Bush are listening.
|
|
|
| |
| "Miserable Failure" Links to Bush |
| 12.07.03 (4:47 pm) [edit] |
On the lighter side ... if you enter: [i]Miserable Failure [/i]on the Google Search Engine http://www.google.com , then you are directed to a link on the White House web-site's http://www.whitehouse.gov/pre... biography of George W. Bush ... [i]Ha ha ha ha ha![/i]
Perhaps, someday if one enters: [i]Historical Failure[/i], then a long list of web-sites describing the crimes perpetrated by the corrupt Bush regime [i][b]No Longer In Office [/b][/i]will appear ... "We the People" can only hope and vote in 2004! ...
[b]Sources[/b]:
"'Miserable Failure' Links to Bush" on http://www.commondreams.org/h...
"'Miserable failure' links to Bush", BBC, on http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/am...
|
|
|
| |
| Cheney's Pimp Halliburton Handed $1 Billion Using Delay Tactics |
| 12.07.03 (7:19 am) [edit] |
As the squalid & sordid Bush family rake in hundreds of millions (possibly billions) in immoral, illegal(?), and anti-christian war-profits, the Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] campaign contributors are swindling, plundering and looting the blood, sweat and tears of our people, and the U.S. treasury.
The legacy of the corrupt Bushies will be the ruthless exploitation of our nation for private profit, with a pathetic and despicable epitaph: "[i]There isn't a favor for corporations that we won't grant[/i]."
In "Iraq delays hand Cheney firm $1bn" on http://observer.guardian.co.u...,6903,1101341,00.html :
Halliburton, the engineering group formerly run by US vice-president Dick Cheney, has been given $1 billion worth of reconstruction work in Iraq by the US government without having to compete for it, thanks to repeated delays in opening up a key contract to competition.
The Houston-based company was controversially awarded a contract to repair Iraq's damaged oil infrastructure without competition in February.
The cost-plus contract means the amount spent by the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), which is running the work, is open-ended, rather than being fixed at the outset, because the scope of the damage was unknown. The USACE described the contract as a 'bridge to competition', but original plans to award the work competitively in August have repeatedly slipped. So far, $1.7bn has been made available to Halliburton for the work.
Figures obtained from the USACE by Democrat Congressman Henry Waxman indicate that on 21 August, around the time the contract should have been opened to competition, the amount made available to KBR, the Halliburton subsidiary involved, was $704m. Since then the total has risen by $1.011bn.
Waxman said: 'Since August, when the follow-on contracts were supposed to be awarded, the administration has obligated more than $1bn to Halliburton under the oil infrastructure contract. These inexplicable delays may be good for Halliburton; they are costing taxpayers a bundle.'
The figures have emerged as the UK Government and contractors reacted with dismay to news this week that competitive tendering had again been pushed back to between 15 December and 17 January. Previously it was delayed to mid-October, late October, then year-end.
One leading UK contractor, which made strong representations in Whitehall this week, said: 'We are very disappointed that it has been put back again,' adding that the longer the delay, the more KBR benefited.
Brian Wilson, the Prime Minister's special representa tive on reconstruction, wrote to Blair in advance of President Bush's recent visit, urging him to press for a level playing field in Iraq.
Wilson said: 'These are very important contracts for the future of the Iraqi oil industry. We think keeping a level playing field is very important, and the further delay is regrettable.'
USACE says that the August date was not a deadline for contract award, but for tenders to be submitted. However, in a letter dated 2 May to Waxman, a US army general states the 'best estimate for the award of the contract based on this schedule is approximately the end of August'. According to contract rules, Halliburton can make a margin of up to 7 per cent on the work.
[b]Other sources[/b]:
"Daddy, Jeb, Neil & the Mad King George Bush's Corrupt Billions $$$ "One Family" BANK" on http://www.tblog.com/template...
"[i]Halliburton, the engineering group formerly run by U.S. vice-president Dick Cheney, has been given $1 billion worth of reconstruction work in Iraq by the U.S. government without having to compete for it, thanks to repeated delays in opening up a key contract to competition, Oliver Morgan, industrial editor for The Observer reports[/i]." on http://freeinternetpress.com/...
"When Will They Ever Learn?" on http://www.liberalslant.com/e...
|
|
|
| |
| WHAT A DIFFERENCE an ocean makes ... |
| 12.06.03 (8:15 am) [edit] |
[b][i]WHAT A DIFFERENCE an ocean makes ...[/i][/b]
[i]The nation's job market continued to strengthen in November, with the unemployment rate falling slightly to 5.9 percent and payroll employment rising for a fourth consecutive month, the Labor Department reported yesterday[/i].
U.S.A. Washington Post, December 6th 2003 [ http://www.washingtonpost.com... ]
[i]The US economy generated significantly fewer jobs than expected in November, according to government figures issued on Friday, damping hopes of a swift revival in the sluggish labour market[/i].
U.K. Financial Times, December 5th 2003 [ http://news.ft.com/servlet/Co... ]
We[i] cut-n-paste[/i], you decide ...
[b]Source[/b]:
TalkingPointsMemo on http://www.talkingpointsmemo....
[b]Official statistics[/b]:
* Number of people[i] without jobs [/i]around 8.8 million ([i]Bush has destroyed 3 million jobs since 2000[/i])
* Number of people [i]living below the poverty line [/i]around 35 million
* Number of people[i] homeless [/i]around 3.5 million
[b]Unofficial statistics[/b]:
* Number of people[i] without jobs [/i]around 25 million ... but the government doesn't include those no longer qualifying for unemployment, convicted prisoners released from prison, and others lost in the math-- to artificially distort the numbers
* Number of people [i]living below the poverty line established in the 1960s, [/i]far in excess of 35 million ... but the government will not adjust the poverty line upwards to avoid helping families in dire need and-- to artificially distort the numbers
* Number of people[i] homeless [/i]more than 3.5 million but they are invisible so the government does not take account ... and does not care ... and does not want us to know ...
[b]Is the corrupt, callous and arrogant Bush regime's motto: [/b]"[i]What you don't know, won't hurt you[/i]" or "[i]Ignorance is bliss[/i]" or "[i]Ignore it, and the problem will go away[/i]" OR [b]all of the above[/b]?
|
|
|
| |
| Bush Economy Enriches Corporate Swindlers: GAP Between Haves & HaveNOTs Skyrockets |
| 12.05.03 (2:10 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" are being scammed ([i]neo-conned?[/i]) again [/b]... however, [i]fool me once, shame on you-- fool me twice, shame on me[/i], is apt ... The American public has been witness to lies, deceptions and falsehoods perpetrated by the corrupt Bush/Cheney Inc. propaganda machine, on a massive scale, unseen since the neo-orwellian days of Hitler and Stalin:--
[i]* Immoral & illegal wars turned bloody guerrilla quagmires, resulting in the deaths of tens of thousands;
* Neo-fascist Patriot Acts devised to unravel and dismantle our democracy and the U.S. Constitution & Bill of Rights;
* Failed domestic policies that enable corporations, the wealthy plutocrats & the richest-of-the-rich to plunder and loot our nation's treasury, people and environment[/i].
Ergo, it is time for all citizens to rise-up and reject the neo-con, neo-fascist Bush regime, who are inflicting such heinous damage upon the United States of America and the entire world.
A small rise in [i]Gross Domestic Product [/i](GDP) and a [i]miniscule drop in the official unemployment rate[/i]-- and the right-wing neo-con hypocrites crow and screech like vultures. [b]Productivity benefits & improvements that simply [i]end-up translated into many more mansions, fleets of yachts & diamond tiaras for the filthy rich top-dogs & fat-cats[/i]-- ISN'T GOOD FOR AMERICA-- IT IS ONLY BENEFICIAL IF PRODUCTIVITY GAINS PRODUCE JOBS AND PROSPERITY FOR ALL, AND NOT JUST THE CORPORATE ROBBER-BARONS & WEALTHY PLUTOCRATS[/b].
Without taking into account the real status quo, one might make the mistake of [i]popping open the champagne [/i]([i]which the corporate top-dogs & fat-cats, and the filthy rich are doing-- since they have been awarded massive boondoggles, tax loopholes & tax cuts by the corrupt Bushies[/i])-- only to find ourselves ([i]Middle Class, Low-Income Workers, the Poor, etc[/i].) unable to feed our families, because we're paying off the historically record-level deficits/debts [i]run-up [/i]by the spend-thrift and ruthless swindlers in the Bush regime.
Meanwhile, the stark cold[i] truth & reality [/i]are that:
- Clinton created 22 million new jobs in 8 years-- Bush has destroyed 3 million ([i]so the fact that we're getting back a few hundred thousand in the last few months, does not undo the substantial havoc, damage & wreckage reeked by Bush[/i]) -- and leaves us with a NET LOSS under Bush-- Moreover, according to unofficial unemployment rates ([i]including those who have lost their unemployment benefits[/i])-- the rate is closer to 15% or 25 million people seeking a job, instead of the 9 million the Bush thugs & goons propagandize.
- Over 35 million citizens live below the poverty line, [i]established in the 1960s[/i]-- it's much, much worse.
- Over 45-85 million citizens have no health care coverage.
- Over 3.5 million citizens are homeless.
- Bush has squandered hundreds of billions of dollars $$$ on corporations & the wealthy, leaving the rest of us with a record-level $560 Billion deficit in 2003 alone ([i]over $1.9 Trillion in deficits from 2000-2004[/i]) and the [i]largest debts in our nation's history[/i]-- And NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT: except for [i]Death, Chaos, Mayhem & Misery[/i].
But, the corrupt Bushies and their neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters don't give a damn-- because they've raped the rest of us senseless-- and are living like neo-emperors during the hellish days of the gluttonous Roman Empire.
The gap between the top 5% richest-of-the-rich who are stealing this nation's assets and swindling our productivity gains-- and, the rest of the population is growing at a terrifyingly rapid rate. Make no mistake, my fellow citizens:-- [i]there is no cause for celebration[/i], as the Middle-Class is being destroyed by the corrupt [i]corporate-take-all [/i]Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta[/i] to install their insane PNAC Global Corporate Empire.
In "[i][b]Looting the Future[/b][/i]", Professor Paul Krugman, describes the[i] unpleasant reality[/i], on http://www.nytimes.com/2003/1... :
[b]One thing you have to say about George W. Bush[/b]: he's got a great sense of humor. At a recent fund-raiser, according to The Associated Press, he described eliminating weapons of mass destruction from Iraq and ensuring the solvency of Medicare as some of his administration's accomplishments.
Then came the punch line: "I came to this office to solve problems and not pass them on to future presidents and future generations." He must have had them rolling in the aisles.
In the early months of the Bush administration, one often heard that "the grown-ups are back in charge." But if being a grown-up means planning for the future — in fact, if it means anything beyond marital fidelity — then this is the least grown-up administration in American history. It governs like there's no tomorrow.
Nothing in our national experience prepared us for the spectacle of a government launching a war, increasing farm subsidies and establishing an expensive new Medicare entitlement — and not only failing to come up with a plan to pay for all this spending in the face of budget deficits, but cutting taxes at the same time.
Recent good economic news doesn't change the verdict. These aren't temporary measures aimed at getting the economy back on its feet; they're permanent drains on the budget. Serious estimates show a long-term budget gap, even with a recovery, of at least 25 percent of federal spending. That is, the federal government — including Medicare, which Mr. Bush has given new responsibilities without new resources — is nowhere near solvent.
Then there's international trade policy. Here's how the steel story looks from Europe: the administration imposed an illegal tariff for domestic political reasons, then changed its mind when threatened with retaliatory tariffs focused on likely swing states. So the U.S. has squandered its credibility: it is now seen as a nation that honors promises only when it's politically convenient.
What really makes me wonder whether this republic can be saved, however, is the downward spiral in governance, the hijacking of public policy by private interests.
The new Medicare bill is a huge subsidy for drug and insurance companies, coupled with a small benefit for retirees. In comparison, the energy bill — which stalled last month, but will come back — has a sort of purity: it barely even pretends to be anything other than corporate welfare. Did you hear about the subsidy that will help Shreveport get its first Hooters restaurant?
And it's not just legislation: hardly a day goes by without an administrative decision that just happens to confer huge benefits on favored corporations, at the public's expense. For example, last month the Internal Revenue Service dropped its efforts to crack down on the synfuel tax break — a famously abused measure that was supposed to encourage the production of alternative fuels, but has ended up giving companies billions in tax credits for spraying coal with a bit of diesel oil. The I.R.S. denies charges by Bill Henck, one of its own lawyers, that it buckled under political pressure. Coincidentally, according to The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Henck has suddenly found himself among the tiny minority of taxpayers facing an I.R.S. audit.
Awhile back, George Akerlof, the Nobel laureate in economics, described what's happening to public policy as "a form of looting." Some scoffed at the time, but now even publications like The Economist, which has consistently made excuses for the administration, are sounding the alarm.
To be fair, the looting is a partly bipartisan affair. More than a few Democrats threw their support behind the Medicare bill, the energy bill or both. But the Bush administration and the Republican leadership in Congress are leading the looting party. What are they thinking?
The prevailing theory among grown-up Republicans — yes, they still exist — seems to be that Mr. Bush is simply doing whatever it takes to win the next election. After that, he'll put the political operatives in their place, bring in the policy experts and finally get down to the business of running the country.
But I think they're in denial. Everything we know suggests that Mr. Bush's people have given as little thought to running America after the election as they gave to running Iraq after the fall of Baghdad. And they will have no idea what to do when things fall apart.
[b]Other Sources[/b]:
"The Growing Gap Between Rich and Poor" on http://www.globalpolicy.org/s...
"The growing gap between rich and poor" on http://www.socialistworker.or...
"The gap between the haves and the have-nots in terms of wealth is greater now than at any time since 1929, immediately preceding the Great Depression." on http://americanassembler.com/...
"America's rich get richer thanks to tax-cutting Bush" on http://idaho.indymedia.org/ne...
"Economy" on http://www.literalpolitics.co...
"George W. Bush on Corporations" on http://www.issues2000.org/Cel...
"Bush Domestic Agenda: No Job Program; Tax Cuts for Wealthy; No Help for States" on http://www.laboreducator.org/...
"Bush pushes new tax windfall for the rich" on http://www.wsws.org/articles/...
"Bush Economy: Temporary Growth, Lasting Damage" on http://www.thetruthaboutgeorg...
|
|
|
| |
| Send The Arm-Chair Chicken-Hawks 'Off-to-Battle' To Fight Their Own Wars |
| 12.05.03 (9:25 am) [edit] |
[b]Isn't it time for "We the People" to send the corrupt and insane neo-con[i] arm-chair chicken-hawks[/i] 'off-to-battle' to fight their own wars?
Let those who LUST for War GO to War![/b]
These neo-con "[b]crazies[/b] ([i]Pentagon's nickname for the neo-con PNAC groupies who have hijacked our government[/i])" will fabricate any manner of lies, deceptions and falsehoods, that the neo-fascists in the White House ([i]The Mad King George, Cheney, Rice, Rove[/i]) and the Pentagon ([i]Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith, Bolton[/i]) then launch in their neo-orwellian propaganda wars against the American people-- in order to "[i]Shock-and-Awe[/i]" us into a state of[i] fear and terror[/i], in order to manipulate us like [i]dumb-sheep [/i]into supporting their immoral and illegal incursions into sovereign nations.
The Bush/Cheney Inc. [i]junta's[/i] neo-con thugs and goons intend to enrich themselves and their corrupt corporate cronies ([i]e.g. Halliburton, Carlyle Group, Bechtel, Chevron, Defense & Armament Contractors, et al[/i]) in their neo-fascist Global Corporate Empire. Read the ghoulish [i]Project for the New American Century [/i](PNAC) [ http://www.prisonplanet.com/a... ] -- a frightful "road-map" dreamt up in the "bowels" of these neo-nazi's dreams ([i]our nightmares[/i]), in their lust for power & riches-- and they don't give a damn about the carnage, misery and mayhem, that ensues from their [i]Crimes Against Humanity[/i].
Despite their fiasco of disastrous blood-shed, carnage, mayhem, chaos and misery caused by their bloody-guerrilla quagmire in Iraq-- these neo-con ideologues and neo-crazy incompetents have not yet "[i]learnt their lesson[/i]"! Or, maybe they are so ugly, callous and corrupt-- that they don't care so long as they profit-- and boy, are they profitting ... Billions of $$$ are being raked in by the Bushies and their criminal cronies-in-arms, while better men and women are needlessly and ruthlessly slaughtered in their wars.
One good definition of insanity: "[i]making the same mistake over and over again, and expecting a different result each time[/i]"-- and it's clear that the Bush regime's neo-fascist thugs & goons are insane-- A good remedy may be to send those who lust for their own wars, to go fight these battles at the front-line, in order to finally experience, for the first time in their sordid & squalid lives, some of the horrific realities of their obscene, blood-thirsty decisions that they force upon others!
In "[i][b]All options open, US warns 'rogue' countries - Bolton wants to wage war on the rest of the world[/b][/i]" on http://news.ft.com/servlet/Co... :
"[b]The Bush administration on Tuesday defended its strategy of pre-emptive action against Iraq [/b]- even while admitting that US intelligence had been imperfect - and [i][b]warned that the US was ready to use all options against five other "rogue states".[/b][/i]
[b]John Bolton, under-secretary of state for arms control and international security, singled out [i]Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya and Cuba as being "hostile to US interests[/i]" during a speech in Washington[/b]. [[i]Bolton the neo-con, neo-fascist [b]loon[/b] should be FIRED, as he is unfit to serve in office and is too dangerous, as he is placing our nation in more peril ... my words[/i].]
Mr Bolton, known as a hardliner, also cautioned negotiating partners in Asia and Europe that the US remained sceptical over efforts to induce North Korea and Iran to abide by nuclear safeguard commitments, amid reluctance to take firmer action.
Focusing on Iran and North Korea, the remaining members of what President George W. Bush has dubbed the "axis of evil", Mr Bolton questioned Tehran's commitment to the agreement it reached last month with the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Hassan Rohani, an Iranian official who negotiated Iran's acceptance of comprehensive UN inspections, made clear on Saturday that Tehran intended to resume its uranium enrichment programme. He said Iran would provide its own fuel for at least one of the eight reactors it intended to build.
A resolution passed by the IAEA last week - a compromise between European carrots and the US stick - "requests" Iran to adhere to its voluntary suspension of all enrichment and reprocessing activities, two routes that can lead to building a nuclear weapon.
A senior Iranian official told the Financial Times that hardline clerics had warned they would pull out of its commitments to the IAEA if Iran was not allowed to pursue uranium enrichment, under supervision, as entitled to do so under international agreements.
Mr Bolton expressed doubt over Pyongyang's readiness to resume six-party talks in Beijing this month. He defended Japan's insistence that it raise the issue of its abducted citizens at the talks and said attempts by North Korea to delay the negotiations "should be rejected". In general, he said, the US would pursue diplomatic solutions when possible, while also deploying more robust methods such as the interdiction and seizure of illicit goods.
"If rogue states are not willing to follow the logic of non-proliferation norms, they must be prepared to face the logic of adverse consequences," Mr Bolton said. "It is why we repeatedly caution that no option is off the table."
He acknowledged that US intelligence over covert weapons of mass destruction programmes was "not perfect", and noted that no such weapons had yet been found in Iraq. Still, he insisted the US invasion was justified."
[b]Then you go fight and die, Bolton ... We refuse to remain at the mercy of your insanity![/b]
[b]Sources[/b]:
"Project for the New American Century (PNAC): Cheney's Monstrous Scheme" on http://www.prisonplanet.com/a...
"PNAC.INFO - Exposing the Project For The New American Century" on http://pnac.info/
"The Project for the New American Century" on http://www.informationclearin...
"Project for the New American Century" on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"Project for the New American Century (home)" on http://www.newamericancentury...
|
|
|
| |
| U.S. "Out-of-Control" On Obscene Military Over-Spending For Corporate Boondoggles |
| 12.04.03 (9:55 pm) [edit] |
[b]The U.S. military expenditure is[i] out of control [/i]and has [i]run amok [/i][/b]under the insane [i]corporate-take-all [/i]neo-fascist Bush regime ... Recently Bush passed an obscene and excessive package raising our annual expenditure from $350 Billion to $401+ Billion-- largely to fund swindles and looting by the Defense Contractors ([i]another large corporate rape of American taxpayers[/i]) ...
Instead of investing in our people and funding our crumbling infrastructure ... the neo-con Bushies are funnelling our nation's wealth into scandalous boondoggles, tax loopholes and tax cuts for their corporate cronies, wealthy plutocrats & greedy campaign contributors.
The neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters are colluding in a neo-fascist and mendacious propaganda campaign to "[i]cook the books[/i]" ... however, their lies, deceptions and falsehoods are unable to hide the squalid and sordid truths:
[i]* Over 45-85 million citizens with no health care;
* Between 9-15 million citizens without jobs;
* Over 35 million citizens living below the poverty lines ([i]at 1960s figures ... it's much, much worse[/i]);
* Over 3.5 million citizens are homeless;
* Our environment is being ruthlessly plundered by Bush's horrific undermining of safeguards to protect our air, water, forests, wildlife and lands;
* Our nation's schools, roads, electricity and energy grids, and other infrastructure needs are ignored;
* Bush has reckessly squandered hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars for "welfare-for-the-rich" corporations & the plutocracy, resulting in the largest deficits and debts in our nation's history, at over $560 Billion in 2003 alone, and $1.9 Trillion from 2000-2004.[/i]
Meanwhile, [i][b]Bush panders to the Military Industrial Complex[/b][/i] with an insane, obscene over-spending on military boondoggles-- that does not make us any safer-- indeed, it makes us much, much less secure and place us in peril ... and moreover, is economically bankrupting "We the People".
[b]The U.S.A. spends more than all other nations in the world combined-- and this is skyrocketing under Bush[/b]:
[image]WinstonSmith_13573 03366.jpg[/image]
[b]The U.S.A. exports armaments and weaponry on a massive scale to other countries ([i]who later use these weapons to kill us-- but the kids of the Bushies & the Defense Industry corporate robber-barons don't go fight in wars[/i])[/b]:
[image]WinstonSmith_22901 5763.jpg[/image]
[b]The U.S.A. (under Bush) has sparked an arms-race unseen since the Cold War ... this insane build-up places us at dire risk of dangerous confrontation[/b]:
[image]WinstonSmith_36258 2591.jpg[/image]
[b]We need a strong military and defense ... but paradoxically, massive amounts of money are mis-spent and we are less safe than ever before ... More and more and more guns does not make you safer ... Good judgment about balancing security with other needs of the nation is what responsible leaders are able to do. The Bushies are irresponsible.[/b]
[b]Sources[/b]:
"D.C. Upside Down - IRAQ EFFECT: It’s undermining the role of the ideologues in the biggest foreign- policy election since 1968" on http://www.msnbc.com/news/998...
"Scary and scandalous" on http://www.guardian.co.uk/lea...,3604,1093202,00.html
"Is Our Massive Defense Budget Keeping Us Safe?" on http://www.pbs.org/now/politi...
"Overseeing U.S. Defense Dept. Spending" on http://www.pbs.org/now/politi...
"Defense Spending Resouces" on http://www.pbs.org/now/politi...
"Department of Defense Insider" on http://www.pbs.org/now/politi...
|
|
|
| |
| The Bush Regime Is Systematically Dismantling U.S. Democracy |
| 12.04.03 (7:02 pm) [edit] |
[b]"We the People" should be alarmed [/b]as we are witness to the corrupt Bush regime's systematic dismantlement of democracy in the United States of America.
[b]In an article for the International Herald Tribune[/b], Charles Levendosky spells out the irony of the administration's half-hearted attempt at imposing democracy in Iraq at the same time it is disregarding the constitution here at home. He writes: "[i]Access to information about government actions, the ability to share that information with other citizens and the right to protest government policies are all fundamental to a representative democracy. Open government and open records are not popular concepts with the Bush administration. Yet they are essential to a citizenry that wishes to participate in helping the government select a wise direction in both domestic and foreign policies[/i]." [ http://www.iht.com/search.php...(NYT)&date=20031203130937 ]
[b]Sources[/b]:
"Dismantling U.S. democracy" on http://www.iht.com/search.php...(NYT)&date=20031203130937
"Democracy or Hypocrisy" on http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/20...
AlterNet on http://www.alternet.org
|
|
|
| |
| U.S. Rejects Iraqi Plans To Hold Census By Summer |
| 12.04.03 (2:34 pm) [edit] |
[b]Can you believe it?[/b] First the corrupt Bushies deny the Iraqis their demand for elections because they do not have a current [i]up-to-date [/i]census count ... and then when the Iraqis establish a plan to hold a census by next summer-- their plan is quickly[i] rejected out-of-hand[/i], without review, involvement or authorisation by the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC)!
The neo-con, neo-fascist Bush regime does not WANT democratically held elections-- because the Iraqi people are likely to reject the swindler, embezzler & thug Ahmed Chalabi ([i]Cheney-Rice-Rumsfeld- Wolfowitz Gang's Puppet & Whore[/i]) ... and select instead, leaders who will refuse the corrupt Bush regime's immoral and illegal [i]corporate-take-all [/i]rape and theft of their OIL, and the plundering and looting of their businesses. After all, why should the Iraqi people be allowed to have a voice in their own future? ... Why should they be allowed to have a democracy? ... Why should they be allowed to have free elections? ([i]Before the [i]corporate-bought-and-p aid-for [/i]Bushies and their [i]corporate-take-all [/i]pimps have plundered Iraq for all it is worth[/i]!)
"We the People" are witness to the neo-imperial Bush regime's contempt for democracy both here at home, and abroad:
In "[i]U.S. Rejects Iraqi Plan to Hold Census by Summer[/i]" on http://www.nytimes.com/2003/1... :
[b]BAGHDAD, Iraq, Dec. 3 — Iraqi census officials devised a detailed plan to count the country's entire population next summer and prepare a voter roll that would open the way to national elections in September. But American officials say they rejected the idea, and the Iraqi Governing Council members say they never saw the plan to consider it[/b].
The practicality of national elections is now the subject of intense debate among Iraqi and American officials, who are trying to move forward on a plan to give Iraqis sovereignty next summer. As the American occupation officials rejected the plan to compile a voter roll rapidly, they also argued to the Governing Council that the lack of a voter roll meant national elections were impractical.
The American plan for Iraqi sovereignty proposes instead a series of caucus-style, indirect elections.
Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the most influential Shiite cleric, is calling for national elections next June, not the indirect balloting specified in the American plan for turning over control of the country. But American officials, and some Iraqis say the nation is not ready for national elections, in part because the logistics are too daunting.
In October, Nuha Yousef, the census director, finished the plan for a quick census, which lays out the timetable in tabular form over several pages.
"After processing the data, the most important thing is the election roll, and that would be available Sept. 1," she said. Full results, she added, would come in December.
One American official acknowledged in an interview that American authorities had been aware of the quick census plan but rejected it.
Informed of the proposal this week, several members of the Governing Council who advocated a direct national ballot next June 30 said they were upset that they had not seen it. The Census Bureau said it had delivered the plan to the Governing Council on Nov. 1, but apparently it was lost in the bureaucracy.
"This could have changed things," said Dr. T. Hamid al-Bayati, a senior aide to Abdul Aziz al-Hakim, the Governing Council member who announced last week that Shiite religious leaders opposed the indirect elections. Perhaps, he and others suggested, some council members would have argued last month that the vote on self-government should be delayed until September when the voter roll became available.
Another council member who favors national elections said: "I am irate. There is no doubt the situation would be different now, if we had known about this."
Charles Healtly, a spokesman for the occupation authorities, said the Americans knew about the census proposal but decided against pursuing it.
"Rushing into a census in this time frame with the security environment that we have would not give the result that people want," he said. "A lot of preparation work needs to be done for elections, and there is concern not to rush the process."
[i][b]Some Governing Council members say the Americans never told them about the census plan[/b][/i].
[i][b]Some Iraqis have said they wonder why American officials called for caucus elections in June, in part because a census could not be completed in less than a year, while at the same time rejecting a plan to produce a census more quickly[/b][/i].
Louay Hagi, who oversees the Census Bureau in the Planning Ministry, said the proposal was not rushed. In an interview, he said his staff prepared a detailed timetable for a census that was stripped down from the 73 questions asked in the last census six years ago, to 12 basic demographic queries, enabling the work to be done much faster than the normal two-year time frame.
As it had in the past, the bureau would use 400,000 school teachers to visit every household in Iraq on one day, June 30, said Ms. Yousef, the census director. The plan would cost $75 million, Mr. Hagi said, in part to buy 2,500 computers.
"We sent the plan to the Governing Council on Nov. 1 and asked for an answer by Nov. 15," Mr. Hagi said. "We are still waiting for a response." He would not say to whom at the council the proposal was sent.
Adel Abdel Mahdi, who attends every Governing Council meeting on behalf of Mr. Hakim, the council member, said he had never heard about the census proposal and "was surprised" to learn of it.
A council member who does not favor elections, Ghazi Ajil al-Yawar, said, "This is bad," and continued: "You can't have something like this as a secret. It is not a weapon." But he said he did not think knowledge of the plan would have changed the debate last month.
As it turned out, on Nov. 15 the Governing Council announced it had agreed to the American plan for indirect elections to choose a "transitional assembly" in June, the first step in a progression to a new constitution and the election of a new Iraqi government by Dec. 31, 2005.
The debate now is over whether the selection of a transitional assembly next summer should be by caucus-style balloting or a direct national election. Although last week, Ayatollah Sistani declared that he would insist on a direct vote, his aides have since softened that view. In an interview, Mr. Bayati said Mr. Hakim, who is serving as president of the Governing Council this month, was "ready to compromise."
"We want a plan that will reflect the will of the Iraqi people," Mr. Bayati said, "and we could do that by using civic societies in every governorate — union leaders, judges, chiefs of tribes, religious figures and other well-known parties."
An American official said "that sounds essentially like what we have been proposing, but as always the devil is in the details," such as who would choose those people.
Last week the council established a nine-member committee to study the issue of how to choose the transitional assembly.
Mr. Hagi said the quick census was still possible, but that now the results might not be ready until the middle of September.
|
|
|
| |
| Peacemakers Are Threatened With Death |
| 12.04.03 (11:15 am) [edit] |
[b]Frightening and barbaric [/b]are the times we live in today, with insane neo-con "pre-emptive" war-mongering, as well as rapacious domestic policies-- all designed to enrich corporate cronies and wealthy campaign contributors ... Instead of seeking noble goals in the 21st century, we are led by neo-fascist madmen who appeal to the worst in human nature and lust for war and swindles, in order to greedily amasse vast power and riches.
Meanwhile, instead of seeking peace ... instead of eradicating poverty and disease ... instead of improving education and health care ... instead of an enlightened age with responsible leadership and an informed citizenry searching for solutions to the problems we face here on earth to provide the opportunity for all human beings to live decently with dignity, and to protect our environment-- we are lumbered with greedy, corporate-owned puppets and neo-con, neo-fascist ideologues who lust to enrich & empower themselves, irrespective of the bloodshed, mayhem, tragedy, misery and chaos they create for others. The corruption, arrogance and immorality of the Bush regime and their [i]corporate-take-all [/i]ilk knows no bounds.
Unless a popular revolt emerges and "We the People" again take the reigns of power back from the Global Corporate Empire, the neo-con PNAC (Project for the New American Century) thugs and goons, and the corrupt Bush regime &[i] rubber-stamp corporate-owned [/i]politicos in Congress-- we are headed down a catastrophic route towards chaos and misery ...
What does it say about our leaders and our age, when those attempting to broker peace are threatened with death ... and those who are corrupt and blood-thirsty war-mongers are propagandized in "[i]sexy[/i]" photo-ops? We have embarked upon a Neo-Con DARK AGE as the immoral and barbaric "[i]might makes right[/i]" and "[i]brute force trumps negotiation and compromise[/i]" propaganda campaign has sadly gained an ugly mass-appeal ... "[i]Winning at all cost[/i]" is an brutish, cruel and bankrupt philosophy, and it is time to reject it.
Whether or not one agrees with the details of the plans negotiated by these Middle-East peacemakers, who are desperately trying to stop the tragic warfare and bloodshed-- for people to react with such ugly, barbaric ferocity, is very, very terrifying ... and should give the sane human being cause for pause and reflection:
In "[i]Geneva Accord leaves both houses divided -Freelance Mideast peace plan ignites powerful passions[/i]" on http://www.nationalpost.com/w... :
"[b]Is it a sideshow or salvation? The Geneva Accord [/b]professes to be a comprehensive peace plan for the Middle East, hammered out over three years of secret negotiations by Israeli opposition politicians and some retired Palestinian Cabinet ministers.
Unveiled on Monday, it was greeted with great fanfare by the international community at a ceremony in Switzerland headlined by former U.S. president Jimmy Carter, who declared, "It is unlikely that we shall ever see a better foundation for peace."
Nelson Mandela, the former South African president, endorsed the proposal via a video link. Fifty-eight more former presidents, prime ministers, foreign ministers and world leaders, including former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev, released a statement expressing their "strong support" for the accord.
Colin Powell, the U.S. Secretary of State, and Jack Straw, his British counterpart, wrote to the plan's top Israeli and Palestinian negotiators praising their efforts.
[b]But back home, the peacemakers are being treated as traitors.
They have been threatened with death, burned in effigy, spat at, snubbed and ridiculed in both Israel and the Palestinian territories[/b].
Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister, said he "totally rejected" the Geneva Accord, adding it would "amount to suicide" for Israel.
Raanan Gissin, his spokesman, more colourfully described the accord as "a Swiss golden calf," a false idol that would be worshiped by leftists while it destroys Israel.
Two hundred and fifty rabbis, members of Pikuah Nefesh (Preservation of Life), said Israelis who signed the accord should be considered traitors who deserve to be "cast out from human society and brought to trial."
Israeli officials seethed with anger yesterday when U.S. diplomats announced Mr. Powell will meet the accord's chief authors, Yossi Beilin, a former Israeli justice minister, and Yasir Abed Rabbo, a former Palestinian information minister, in Washington tomorrow.
"I think that he is not being useful to the peace process," said Ehud Olmert, the Deputy Prime Minister. "This is an incorrect step by a senior representative of the American administration."
In the Palestinian territories, the al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, a terrorist group allied to Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat's Fatah faction, denounced delegates who negotiated the Geneva Accord as "collaborators with Israel."
Shots were fired at Mr. Rabbo's home in Ramallah. When Palestinian delegates tried to leave Gaza to attend the ceremony in Geneva, they were jostled and spat on by angry crowds.
Two former Cabinet ministers who planned to endorse the accord decided to stay home for their own safety.
Meanwhile, hundreds of Palestinian leaders are calling on Mr. Arafat to reject the peace plan "publicly and clearly."
Typically, Mr. Arafat has refused to commit himself to anything, settling instead for sending a message that called the Geneva Accord "a brave initiative that opens the door to hope."
But up to 1,000 of his supporters paraded through the streets of Gaza denouncing the accord and branding its authors "cowards and collaborators with the Americans and Zionists."
Reactions to the Geneva peace plan are severe simply because it goes right to the heart of the Middle East conflict.
Whereas the floundering U.S.-led "road map" vaguely calls for the creation of a Palestinian state without any specified borders or details, the Geneva Accord is a precise 50-page document that maps out definitive boundaries and outlines a timetable for the withdrawal of the Israeli army from most of the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip.
[b]The Geneva Accord proposes[/b]:
[i]- Creation of a wholly independent Palestinian state occupying all of Gaza and about 98% of the West Bank.
- The division of Jerusalem, with East Jerusalem incorporated into the Palestinian state.
- Palestinian sovereignty over the al-Aqsa Mosque compound in Jerusalem's walled Old City, while Israel controls parts of the Western Wall, which runs alongside the compound.
- Israeli incorporation of about 25% of existing Israeli settlements on the West Bank, leaving the remaining 75% inside the Palestinian state.
- Abandonment of most Palestinians' claims of any right to return to Israel. About 3.5 million Palestinians who lost land to the Israelis will receive some compensation.
- Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and the end of violence against it.
- Setting up of a multinational peacekeeping force to oversee implementation of the peace plan;
- Finally, the accord would be regarded as a final and permanent peace settlement, resolving all existing UN resolutions.[/i]
On the face of it, the proposal seems too good to be true.
The fate of Palestinian refugees and the status of Jerusalem and its holy sites were the main obstacles that prevented the adoption of previous peace plans at Camp David in the summer of 2000 and several months later in talks at the Egyptian resort of Taba.
That failure led directly to the latest Palestinian revolt and the deaths of more than 3,000 people in three years of unrelenting violence.
Still, for some, the Geneva Accord offers a glimmer of hope in a time of war.
For others, its little more than surrender and an invitation to return to the failed Oslo peace process.
Mr. Beilin has little or no credibility among many Israelis, simply because he was the chief initiator of Oslo.
They note angrily that more Israelis have died in terrorist attacks in the 10 years since Mr. Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin, then the Israeli prime minister, signed the Oslo peace agreement in 1993 than in any decade in Israel's history.
Others accuse Mr. Beilin, who lost his Knesset seat in the last election, of engaging in subversive freelance diplomacy that undermines Israel's position in negotiations with the Palestinians.
For many Palestinian refugees, who have been dispossessed for decades, the accord dismisses all their claims to a "right of return" to what is now Israel. They say that ignores their suffering and removes all hope of regaining what they lost.
The accord remains anathema to many on both sides. But while 300 Israelis and Palestinian civilians have done what their current leaders have not been capable of doing, their work is no substitute for a real peace process.
The United States and the European powers may try to use the Geneva Accord to prod Israel and the Palestinians to resume work on their own "road map." But it remains to be seen if the accord is more than a distraction from reality or a genuine contribution to resolving the Middle East's turmoil."
|
|
|
| |
| Noam Chomsky Interview About Bush's Neo-Con Intentions |
| 12.04.03 (8:08 am) [edit] |
[b]Noam Chomsky [/b]is a brilliant intellectual and writer, who has spoken out about the corrupt Bush regime's intentions in Iraq. Unfortunately, Noam Chomsky is more often interviewed overseas, throughout the world, than here at home (although[i] Charlie Rose [/i]recently interviewed Noam Chomsky-- and it is well worth ordering the video or transcript ...). It is time that we listen to serious intellectuals and thinkers, rather than blindly accept the [i]neo-fascist Bush gang's neo-con buffoons, attack-dogs & court-jesters[/i], who drown the airways and shout-down opposing views with inaccurate diatribes, mendacious propaganda and imbecilic screed attempting to justify their unjustifiable[i] Crimes Against Humanity[/i].
"We the People" have been ruthlessly deceived regarding the motives of Bush's insane, immoral and illegal neo-con war turned bloody guerrilla quagmire in Iraq:-- Where are the massive WMDs posing an imminent threat (nuclear "mushroom clouds" and tons of vials of chemical and biological weapons that were about to be used to wipe-out millions of us) ... Also, Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11 and posed no threat to the U.S.A. ... [b]more Bush LIES[/b].
[b][i]Read on ...[/i][/b]
"[b]Interview with Noam Chomsky: '[i]Of course, it was all about Iraq's resources'[/i][/b]" on http://www.gulfnews.com/Artic... :
[i]Edited excerpts of an interview with Noam Chomsky by Simon Mars of Dubai's Business Channel. The interview will be aired again on the programme Perspectives on Tuesday (Business Channel) and Saturday (Channel 33). Noam Chomsky's latest book Hegemony and Survival, America's Quest for Global Dominance was published in November and covers some of the themes included in this interview[/i].
[b]Simon Mars[/b]: [b][i]Do you think control over energy resources was the main reason for the invasion of Iraq[/i]?[/b]
[b]Noam Chomsky[/b]: They didn't decide to invade Eastern Congo where there's much worse massacres going on. Of course it was Iraq's energy resources. It's not even a question. Iraq's one of the major oil producers in the world. It has the second largest reserves and it's right in the heart of the Gulf's oil producing region, which US intelligence predicts is going to be two thirds of world resources in coming years.
The invasion of Iraq had a number of motives, and one was to illustrate the new National Security Strategy, which declares that the United States will control the world permanently by force if necessary and will eliminate any potential challenge to that domination. It is called pre-emptive war.
It is not a new policy, it's just never been announced so brazenly, which is why it caused such uproar, including among the foreign policy elite in the United States. They're appalled by it. But having announced the doctrine, it needed an exemplary action, to show that the United States really meant it.
But if the United States is going to attack somebody, the action has to meet several criteria. The first and crucial criterion is that they must be completely defenseless. It's stupid to attack anyone who can shoot back. Anyone knows this.
They understood perfectly well that Iraq was completely defenseless, the weakest country in the region. Its military expenditure was about a third of Kuwait, devastated by sanction, held together by Scotch tape. Mostly dis-armed, under complete surveillance, so Iraq met that condition.
Second criteria is that the place attacked has to be important enough to matter. There's no point taking over Eastern Congo, which is also defenseless, but Iraq matters. That's where the issue of oil comes up, since the United States will end up with military bases right in the heart of the oil producing region.
The third criteria is you have to somehow pretend it's a threat to your existence. While the people of Kuwait and Iran might be delighted to tear Saddam Hussein limb from limb, they still did not regard him as a threat. No-one thought he was a threat.
But in the United States the propaganda did succeed in moving the American population, and Congress passed a resolution authorizing the use of force to defend the US against the continuing threat posed by Iraq. No matter what you think, that's just laughable.
[b][i]How many people know that Donald Rumsfeld gave Saddam Hussein golden spurs back in 1983[/i]?[/b]
A little of that has begun to leak out, but how many people know that Colin Powell, the present administration moderate, was the National Security Advisor at the time of Halabja massacre, when the Reagan administration, responded by simply increasing aid to Saddam Hussein, as did the first Bush administration later.
They knew that this aid was used for chemical and biological warfare, and for developing missiles and nuclear weapons. But they did not care so the aid continued.
Nowadays, Powell moans about the graves in Halabja, but he didn't care at the time. They now claim this was because of the war with Iran, but it had nothing to do with the war in Iran. The war in Iran was over. They provided aid to their friend Saddam Hussein because of their duty to support US exporters, as they said on public record.
When Saddam Hussein was massacring the Kurds, he was also wiping out agricultural areas. They needed agricultural aid and US agro-business was delighted to have the US taxpayer pay them to send agricultural aid to Iraq. Ronald Reagan, George Bush, Colin Powell and Dick Cheney thought that was just fine. Then it gets worse.
Right now, since the weapons of mass destruction have not been found, there are other excuses being used for the invasion of Iraq. In article after article, Thomas Friedman of New York Times, as well as Colin Powell, both moan about the mass graves that have been discovered.
It is true they did not see them before, but of course they knew they were there. In 1991, after the Gulf War, the US had total control of the whole region, Saddam Hussein was effectively authorized to massacre the Shiites, and to put down the rebellion that could have overthrown him.
Today, Thomas Friedman is agonizing about the mass graves, but if you go back and read him in 1991, he knew about them. He was the New York Times' Chief Diplomatic Correspondent, and he said that the best of all worlds for the United States would be an iron fisted military junta that would rule Iraq the same as Saddam Hussein, but since Saddam is an embarrassment, lets try to get someone else. And if we cannot find someone else, we will have to settle for second best, Saddam Hussein himself.
The British are an interesting case. In the US, we have pretty much the same government that was in office in 1991. But in Britain, today's government was in opposition in 1991. There were parliamentary protests in England about the gassing of the Kurds and so on, but try to find the names of Tony Blair, Jeff Hoon, Jack Straw, I think even Robin Cook. They're missing.
[b][i]What do the American public think about the situation in Israel[/i]? [/b]
The study by the Program on International Policy Attitudes, PIPA, has done very interesting in-depth studies of people's attitudes towards Israel and Palestine, but they are never reported because the conclusions are unacceptable.
The PIPA study found that a considerable majority of the American population favour what is called the Saudi plan, which is the latest version of international consensus on a two state settlement that the United States has been unilaterally blocking since 1975. Yet about two thirds of the United States' population supports it.
The Poll shows that a large majority of people in the United States think that they should cut off aid to either of the two parties, Israel or the Palestinians, if they refuse to enter into goodwill negotiations.
[b][i]Next question. Suppose that both sides enter into negotiations, what should the United States do[/i]? [/b]
Give equal aid to Israel and the Palestinians.
[b][i]Then comes the next question. Should the United States be more involved in this[/i]? [/b]
Yes. Same large majority. That's a contradiction, a self contradiction. It's the United States involvement since the mid 1970's that's prevented a political settlement. Step by step, vetoes at the Security Council since 1976 – votes alone, or with one or two client states of the General Assembly blocking the plan.
Supporting the Israeli invasion of Lebanon with the express purpose of undermining the possible threat of negotiations and on and on…
[b][i]So the US is involved in what it describes it "the peace process," yet it is actually be trying to prevent peace … you just can't make that connection[/i].[/b]
By definition the United States is running the peace process, but does that mean they're trying to bring peace? Of course not. You can go back to 1971 when Anwar Al Sadat, the new president of Egypt offered a full peace treaty to Israel with only one condition: That it withdraw from Egyptian territory. Nothing about the Palestinians. Nothing about the West Bank or Golan Heights. Just withdraw from Egyptian territory and you can have a full peace treaty.
Israel understood it, they considered it, they recognized it was a genuine peace offer that they could accept and end the state of war. They turned it down because they said it was more important to expand settlements.
At the point the settlements were in the North Eastern Sinai, and tens of thousands of Bedouins had been kicked out. It was a Labour government, not Sharon, and it decided that it was more important to expand into the northern Sinai, so they rejected Sadat's offer.
[b][i]Well what did the United States do[/i]? [/b]
That's crucial, that determined what happened. There was an internal debate in the United States and the United States government. Henry Kissinger – his position won out. As he wrote, was that we should reject negotiations and he called for a stalemate. No negotiations just force. So the United States backed Israel's rejection of Sadat's peace offer. That led directly to the 1973 war.
The 1973 war was a close call for Israel, very dangerous. There was a nuclear alert; there was a close call for the world. I mean even Kissinger, who's not very smart, understood that we can't just assume Egypt's a basket case. We have to do something. So he began the shuttle diplomacy that then ended up in Camp David with the Camp David agreements. That is hailed as a triumph in American diplomacy. Carter just won the Nobel Peace prize for it.
It was a catastrophe of American diplomacy.
What they accepted at Camp David was Sadat's 1971 proposal but now in terms that were much more harsh for both the United States and Israel because by 1978 Sadat was calling for a consensus on the Palestinians and leaving the rest to the occupied territories. So actually the United States at Camp David was forced to accept a proposal, that was worse from their point of view and Israel's point of view, than the one they turned down in 1971.
In the United States, Carter immediately raised US aid to Israel to over 50 percent of total aid. Israel understood what was happening. Egypt, the only Arab deterrent, was out of the conflict, and the United States had increased aid. Israel drew the conclusion that the US was telling us that we can expand into the occupied territories and attack our northern neighbour, which is exactly what they did.
Since 1976, the first veto at the Security Council and in fact back to 1971, the United States has been blocking, unilaterally blocking a Middle East peace settlement. A settlement whose terms are accepted by almost the entire world. I mean in 1976 the major Arab states accepted it, the Palestinian Liberation Army accepted it, Europe accepted it. In fact, everyone accepted it. The United States vetoed it.
The United States seems set to enter a very dark phase of its history with the domestic legislation such as Patriot and its foreign affairs policy.
[b][i]Do you think things have a chance of getting better[/i]?[/b]
Remember that the people now in control are an extremely reactionary nationalist wing, even of the Republican Party. The major foreign policy journals like Foreign Affairs, wrote very critical articles about the National Security Strategy. The people in control are an extremist wing; and they barely hold political power.
The presidential elections in 2000 were disputed election, and they barely managed to sneak through, with a few tens of thousands of votes.
[b][i]How did they do it[/i]? [/b]
By frightening people. The attack on Iraq was purposely timed, the announcement of it, to the start of the election campaign. The campaign manager made it clear when he said we've got to focus the election on national security issues because people don't like our social and economic policy, naturally because they're harming most of the population.
They're trying essentially to reverse the progressive legislation of the past century and people don't like it so we focus on national security issues. That way we frighten them.
You don't know how long people can be controlled. It's a free country you know. People are free to say what they want. Do what they want. There is very little coercion possible. Some, but very little, so sooner or later people are not going to accept what's being done to them.
When that will happen? Hard to say.
[b][i]What is your assessment of how the World Bank, the IMF and WTO have structured the global economy[/i]? [/b]
The IMF and World Bank have played various roles since they were founded but let's take the last 30 years, the period of so called neo-liberalism. This new era began in the early 1970's after Richard Nixon dismissed the Bretton Woods system, established by Keynes and White right after the Second World War.
Breton Woods was based on the principle that countries could control capital flow, so you could prevent capital flight. That's what Britain did after the war to allow recovery. Also currencies were fixed within a pretty narrow band, so there was very little speculation against currency.
Those were the fundamental principles, which were eliminated in the early 1970's, first by the Nixon's US, then Britain, Switzerland and other major countries. It was perfectly well understood what this would mean.
Keynes pointed ou | |
