///Taking the Illusions Out of History-I would like to be able to love my country and justice///
home /// archives
Saturday, May 25, 2002
White Collar Crime
SafeHarbor & Satsop WA - PDA -- Greed and Incompetence or Corruption? Why did Governor Locke publicly endorse and use taxpayer money to fund such a bogus plan? Was it because his brother in law, Judd Lee was the Chief Financial Officer? Coincidentally Lee bailed out of SafeHarbor right before the walls came tumbling down. Did Locke tip him off? As reported by the media: Extravagance, mismanagement and deception: The sins of a troubled public-private partnership. Reporter's dedication unearths misuse of taxpayer dollars
Enron's Enablers
Enron Contributions to State-Level -- Enron and its highest-ranking executive contributed nearly $1.1 million to state-level candidates and party committees during the 2000 election cycle, giving to 702 candidates in 28 states and to party committees in 19 states.
Inside Enron -- The Man Behind the New Enron
Carlyle's Way -- Making a mint inside "the iron triangle" of defense, government and industry -- Like everyone else in the US, the group stood transfixed as the events of September 11 unfolded. Present were former secretary of defense Frank Carlucci, former secretary of state James Baker III, and representatives of the bin Laden family. This was not some underground presidential bunker or CIA interrogation room. It was the Ritz-Carlton in DC, the annual investor conference of one of the most powerful, well-connected, and secretive companies in the world: the Carlyle Group.
Preventing Invention Promotion Scams
Ethical Culture in the Workplace -- Unethical behavior in the workplace is often the result of pressure from above, say experts.
Business Crime, Fraud and Abuse Mean the Poor Still Pay More -- 30 years ago David Caplovitz wrote The Poor Pay More. His evidence created quite a stir, articles were written about consumer abuses against people least able to endure them or fight back. Some protective legislation was passed and some good court decisions were written. Now comes the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) to report that business crime, fraud and abuse are thriving on the backs of poor Americans. The laws are not enforced and can not keep up with the creative scams that pour forth, not just from retail sharks, but larger companies and their law firms.
How to Research Front Groups -- Tips for people seeking to research and report on public relations front groups.
Glossary of insurance scams costing all of us money, and in some cases, causing significant injury and bodily harm.
A Corporate Crime Wave? -- Crime may have declined in the streets but Internet, communications, and stock market booms of the 1990s, it seems, were based on a pervasive series of felonious acts.
Investigating the IRS -- Millions Spent For Recruiting and Relocating -- The Internal Revenue Service is charged with collecting taxes from Americans in order to pay for the work of government.
Financial crime -- During the past 20 years there have been a number of resolutions passed by the ICPO-Interpol General Assembly, which have called on member countries to concentrate their investigative resources in identifying, tracing and seizing the assets of criminal enterprises.
Corruption -- Any agreement between parties to act or refrain from acting in violation of the Public Trust for profit or gain in either the private- or public sector.
The US Justice Department considers health care fraud the No 1 white collar crime. Federal health care analysts estimate fraud costs $30 billion a year, or 3% of overall health spending. This compares with estimates of less than 1% in the 1980s.
Insurance Fraud 2nd Most Costly White Collar Crime after Tax Evasion
Disaster-related Frauds Continue -- Con artists are exploiting the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11 to bilk people. National Fraud Information Center/Internet Fraud Watch counselors have begun to hear from consumers about possible disaster-related scams.
Becoming a victim of a natural disaster may be impossible to avoid. But you can avoid being victimized by unscrupulous contractors who prey on a disaster's innocent victims, according to the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB).
17 business scams to avoid at all costs.
Understanding and Avoiding Identity Theft -- The US Government defines it like this: "[I]dentity theft occurs when someone appropriates your personal information without your knowledge to commit fraud or theft." To put that in more day-to-day terms, it works like this: Someone gets your name, address, social security number and credit card or other information, and uses them to run up big bills, pretending they're actually you. They skip on the bills and leave you with ruined credit and collectors hounding you.
The Latest Plague: ATM Pickpockets are skimming debit cards to raid customer accounts. By inserting their cards into an ATM, customers of 3 New York banks; Citibank, Dime Bancorp and JP Morgan Chase have had their accounts cleaned out.
Financial Angels? -- Beware of offers by western firms that offer credit deals that sound too good to be true.
The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners -- An international organization dedicated to fighting fraud and white-collar crime.
On trial - 257-year-old Sotheby's auction house chairman and primary shareholder Albert Taubman, 77-year-old multimillionaire. Taubman bought the auction house in 1983. He is charged with colluding with their principal rival Christie's to fix commissions, divvy up business, and cheat customers. He faces up to 3 years in prison and enormous fines if convicted in the antitrust prosecution. Sotheby's and Christie's have been competitors for over 200 years, dominating the high end of the auction business in a virtual duopoly. Many of the world's most valuable artworks have passed through one of their doors over the years.
Martin Frankel Explains His Downfall - Frankel denies he is a master thief, saying that the lengthy sentence he faces in America is “inhumane.” Frankel vanished from his Connecticut mansion leaving behind a pile of burning documents, including a “to-do-list” with items such as “launder money.” Carrying diamonds and cash he fled for Rome in a private jet, sparking an international manhunt. Frankel eluded authorities for four months, but was finally captured at an upscale hotel in Hamburg, Germany. He was arrested for carrying a false passport and was taken into German custody. ABC News
Over 1.3 million pounds of PCB's were dropped in the Hudson river by GE.
The Collapse of Barings -- A distinguished member of the Baring family, who remains anonymous recalls Baring Brothers' image of itself during the banking crisis of 1974. A number of fringe banks that had lent unwisely to property speculators had failed, and the virus spread so fast that the Bank of England had to reassure the City about the soundness of even the National Westminster Bank. But at number 8 Bishopsgate, Baring Brothers was untroubled. It had never been tempted to plunge into the property business. He was expressing, simultaneously, the instinctive conservatism and complacency of recent generations of Barings, their Olympian detachment and the discretion one would expect from the Queen's bankers. All these attributes explain why it is that, while individual Barings can be delightful company, their name stirs strong feelings but excites little sympathy.
The Microsoft File -- The Secret Case Against Bill Gates -- Bill Gates, has engaged in a pattern of predatory business practices over the past decade that have all but killed the market in operating systems and applications software, and now likewise threaten to stifle free competition in the Internet and electronic commerce arenas. What has happened to Netscape is just the most recent example of an alarming pattern that becomes evident from an analysis of the strategy and tactics of Bill Gates and Microsoft since the early days of the software industry.
Judge Rejects MS Settlement -- US District Judge J. Frederick Motz rejected Microsoft's offer to donate 200,000 refurbished computers and software valued at $1 billion to the nation's poorest public schools to settle a class action lawsuit accusing MS of overcharging for its products. He said the settlement is "critically underfunded" and would have anticompetitive effects on the market, especially on Apple Computer.
A Year in Corporate Crime - Although 3 executives were sentenced to spend a few months in prison (for fraud resulting in ten deaths) and a couple of others seem destined to land in jail eventually, the kindly manner in which most erring business chieftains were treated solidly underscores the fact that in the US a prison sentence is rarely looked upon as the proper fate of corporate villains. The Nation
Fitting a punishment to white-collar crime - White Collar crime rarely prompts the outrage or draws the lengthy prison sentences of street crimes. It leaves no violated or bleeding victim; its perpetrators are often churchgoing community leaders who stand before the judge wearing tailored suits and repentant expressions. Yet financial crimes can devastate an entire community rather than robbing a lone victim. Their impact can last for years, stealing crucial services or a lifetime's savings through crimes invisible to their victims.
Dirty Money -- Among the biggest beneficiaries of the multibillion-dollar drug trade are some of the most respected names in American business.
Is there such a thing as free money? -- Tracking down the truth in those ‘free money’ offers -- Some companies offering through the mail to help people find grant money are nothing but scams.
The Informant -- A True Story -- By the night of the raids, the government amassed an arsenal of evidence unprecedented in a white collar case. Despite the secrecy of the criminals, despite their ability to spend millions of dollars on a defense, despite the political influence they could bring to bear, the possibility that they could beat back the prosecution seemed ludicrous. They were trapped by their own words and images, captured on magnetized plastic ribbon. The government agents felt sure of their investigation.
Two men allegedly tried to drain the brokerage and bank accounts of America's wealthy. Cops recently cracked the case, giving a glimpse of a quiet epidemic: Identity theft.
Identity theft -- Bureaucracies build our roads, fix our phones, enforce our laws. But they’re also powerful enough to trample us, trap us or simply drive us crazy.
Coping with Identity Theft
Hidden credit card risks -- Important information that could save you hundreds of dollars -- It’s enough to ruin your vacation. You reach for your wallet, and it’s gone. It’s not just the cash. It’s those credit card. What happens if they fall into the wrong hands? Here’s important information you need to know about the risks of credit cards and your rights as a consumer — information some people don’t want you to know. What you’re about to learn can not only protect you.
Spotlight on Corporations -- Publishes data on corporate wrongdoing neglected by mainstream press, or in danger of being suppressed by corporate cover-up efforts. Data sources include litigation, internal company documents and government filings. We primarily publish important information.
The New Corporate Tax Break -- The federal deficit just got a lot bigger. A federal appeals court made it much easier for corporations to use tax shelters and investment strategies without getting hassled by the IRS, even if those shelters have no purposes other than tax avoidance.
Common Antitrust Violations -- Serious antitrust overtones are present in many selling situations. For example, companies sometimes refuse to deal with a particular customer; distributors may be cut off from receiving future deliveries of product; salespeople may call a customer to verify a price; the list of examples is endless.
Infact: Challenging Corporate Abuse -- Exposing life-threatening abuses by transnational corporations and organizing successful grassroots campaigns to hold corporations accountable to consumers and society by building an active, aware public and a core of well-trained organizers to lead the challenge to unwarranted corporate influence.
The Center for Study of Responsive Law -- A Ralph Nader organization that supports and conducts research and educational projects to encourage political, economic and social institutions to be aware of the needs of the citizen consumer.
The Center for Health, Environment and Justice -- CHEJ believes in environmental justice, the principle that people have the right to a clean and healthy environment regardless of their race or economic standing. The Center believes the most effective way to win environmental justice is from the bottom up through community organizing and empowerment. CHEJ seeks to help local citizens and organizations come together and take an organized, unified stand in order to hold industry and government accountable and work toward a healthy, environmentally sustainable future.
The Stakeholder Alliance -- A grassroots effort that seeks to change the corporate system to make it responsible to all stakeholders, instead of only to stockholders, and thus return corporations to their original public purpose. Our first objective is to make corporations fully and publicly accountable, through comprehensive public disclosure, for their actions. Did you know: In the late 1970s over 90% of large American corporations provided some degree of social responsibility disclosure, but by the early 80s this had dropped to almost zero? This movement, once so strong, virtually disappeared because it emphasized a “top-down” approach, working with corporate leaders, the accounting profession, and government. When corporations decided that social disclosure was a dispensable luxury, stakeholders had no organized voice with which to resist.
The Center For Auto Safety - Consumers Union and Ralph Nader founded the Center for Auto Safety (CAS) in 1970 to provide consumers a voice for auto safety and quality in Washington and to help lemon owners fight back across the country. CAS has a small budget but a big impact on the auto industry. With less than half what General Motors spends on a single Super Bowl commercial, CAS has taken on the auto giants and won for consumers.
The Center for Insurance Research -- An independent voice for reform in debates about insurance, banks, financial services companies and related public policy issues around the nation. CIR focuses on national and state issues of insurance and financial services regulation in a range of areas including: mutual conversions, health care, illegal discrimination, accessibility, quality assurance, disclosure, corporate and regulatory accountability.
In California professional gambling is a salary-paying job --Gamblers work for legal corporations that specialize in making a profit from games like pai gow. They wear name badges identifying them to other gamblers. "Casino props with college degree preferred needed asap," reads a recent classified ad in the San Francisco Chronicle. "Will train to play casino games. Experience not necessary."
Cybercourts Set for Tech Trials -- Legal experts are closely watching the development of the nation's first "cybercourt," being created in Michigan to allow tech companies to sue each other over the Internet.
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 3:57 PM
May 25, 2002
Thanks for the Heads-Up
By FRANK RICH
heney, Rumsfeld, Ridge, Mueller. Is there anyone who has not warned us of Armageddon over the past week? As far as I can tell, the only slacker in this White House game of Wag the Dog is Spot.
You don't have to be a cynic to believe that the point of the warnings is not to save lives so much as political hides. After all, we can't go about our daily business much differently just because of these dire pronouncements. Nor have they budged the Homeland Security Office's color-coded "threat level" from its weaselly yellow. What this orchestrated chorus of Cassandras can do is guarantee that we duly credit the Bush administration for giving us a heads-up should disaster strike between now and Election Day 2004. Not so incidentally, the new warnings also help facilitate our amnesia about the fracas over how low a priority Al Qaeda was for the White House before Sept. 11.
To see how low, there's no need to learn what was in that top-secret briefing that the president received as he settled down for his monthlong vacation at his Texas ranch on Aug. 6. Reports at the time show that Mr. Bush broke off from work early and spent most of that day fishing. If he had received foreknowledge of an attack that morning, he would have acted upon it, and no Democratic leader has said otherwise (despite Dick Cheney's smears to the contrary).
But that's not the end of the story. A far more revealing indication of the administration's mañana mindset about terrorism comes a month later, on Sept. 9, when Donald Rumsfeld threatened a presidential veto if Congress moved $600 million out of the White House's prized ballistic missile defense system and into counterterrorism. On Sept. 10, John Ashcroft submitted a final Justice Department budget request calling for increases in 68 programs, none of them directly related to combating terrorism.
In this somnolent walkup to Sept. 11, the Bush administration was hardly alone. The terrorism alarm went off loudly in the United States nine years ago — on Feb. 26, 1993, the first attack on the World Trade Center. The Clinton administration, Congress, the press and every government agency entrusted with our security can share responsibility for the subsequent on-again-off-again focus on a network of imaginative killers whose leader, motives, ambitions, potential targets and, as Condoleezza Rice might say, non-traditional hijacking schemes have long been a matter of fact and theory on the public record.
That's history, and no amount of spin from either Bush or Clinton apologists is going to rewrite it. That's also why the question of what the president knew about terrorism on Sept. 11, though important, is hardly the most pressing now, Washington hysteria notwithstanding. Nearly nine months have passed since the day that was supposed to change everything, and Osama bin Laden and most of his top associates, Mullah Omar included, have not been found, dead or alive. The most important question is not how ready we were to fight terrorism on Sept. 11, 2001, but how ready we are to do so as of Memorial Day weekend 2002.
Even the administration's own answers are not reassuring. Asked by Tim Russert last Sunday if the kind of noise that our intelligence is picking up from Al Qaeda this spring is "similar" to the noise prior to Sept. 11, Vice President Cheney answered, "Sure." If that's the case, it's clear that Ari Fleischer's reassurance to the press in February that Al Qaeda has been "severely disrupted and severely hampered" is now inoperative. Further evidence comes from French and German investigators pursuing the car bombings that killed 31 in Tunisia and Pakistan this month and last. One French official told The Times last week that Al Qaeda, now regrouping in the western provinces of our new ally, Pakistan, has sent "a warning for the West — you have not won the war, we are in a position to fight, when we want, where we want."
We are the richest, most can-do country in the world, but at home we're pursuing the war on terrorism with a management style that's pure Kmart. Back in October Mr. Bush declared that his new director of homeland security, Tom Ridge, in charge of coordinating some 70 federal agencies and countless local ones, would "have the full attention and complete support of the very highest levels of our government." Nine months later, Mr. Ridge has neither. What he does have is a new, less-than-high-tech headquarters, with an aboveground Washington address that can be taken out simultaneously with the White House.
The nation's nuclear plants are vulnerable from the air. Its borders are porous to malevolent visitors and matériel (only 2 percent of incoming ship cargo is inspected). The anthrax manhunt is stalled and there has been scant progress in the supposed push to bring local hospitals up to speed in identifying and countering bioterrorism. The I.N.S.'s failure to coordinate with the Social Security Administration, The Times' Robert Pear reports, is still allowing tens of thousands of foreigners to secure illegal Social Security numbers and concoct the fake identities that proved so useful to some of the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Remember Argenbright, the rent-a-guard company that was found to have employed convicts and illegal aliens to enforce airport security? It's still manning the fort in five major airports, from Orlando to O'Hare, where it no doubt continues to do a crack job of strip-searching little old ladies. This week USA Today reported that the new Transportation Security Administration has failed to fix the known security flaws that could allow the easy planting of bombs in the virtually unscreened cargo on passenger jets; the paper also found evidence that the same agency is cutting back on marksmanship training for the federal air marshals it is hiring to do the shooting it prohibits for pilots. As for the airport bomb-detecting machines mandated by Congress, The Wall Street Journal finds 190 in place, with a mere 1,100 still to go.
No classified documents are required to connect these dots. The administration is so fearful that someone will do so that it impugns the patriotism of those who try. No wonder Mr. Bush is fighting Democrats and Republicans alike — an ideological spectrum running from Tom Daschle to William Kristol — who call for an independent commission to investigate what went wrong in both his White House and Bill Clinton's before Sept. 11. The administration knows that inevitably such a commission, proposed in December by John McCain and Joe Lieberman, will provide a road map to what has not been fixed in the nine months since. As a decoy, Mr. Cheney is instead boasting of administration support for a Congressional investigation that has already been hobbled and delayed by political squabbling, false starts and Justice Department and C.I.A. lollygagging. That Congressional investigation, run by intelligence oversight committees that are themselves part of the pre-Sept. 11 failure, promises to be as effective as Congress's pursuit of Whitewater.
But as we need some version of a Warren Commission to get to the bottom of what went wrong, so we need an inverted Manhattan Project (one that will stop a bomb rather than build one) to recruit America's best minds to set things right. Mr. Ridge, a decent politician with no expertise in intelligence or counterterrorism, is a frivolous choice for security czar. Mr. Ashcroft, an aspiring J. Edgar Hoover isolated from reality by a circle of cronies, lacks the intellect and leadership ability to take on an adversary as cunning as Osama bin Laden. What he cares about most is maximizing his own power, and not just over civil liberties. His Justice Department has joined in the effort to block Mr. Ridge from consolidating the four overlapping agencies in charge of watching American borders. Now we learn, with the news of his suppression of the F.B.I. Phoenix memo, that Mr. Ashcroft will even cut the president out of the loop of law-enforcement embarrassments occurring on his watch.
With all the talent in this country and all that's at stake, is this the best we can muster? Addressing a meeting of emergency workers from around the country in New York this week, Thomas Von Essen, the fire commissioner of Sept. 11, said that politicians were "not making the tough decisions" and feared that "we will be standing here crying over police officers and firefighters and civilians next year, this year maybe." His views were echoed by Richard Sheirer, the Giuliani director of emergency management: "We can't let complacency set in, and I think it has already." Given that the history of Al Qaeda tells us that its major attacks are separated by intervals of 12 to 24 months, we'll find out soon enough.
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 2:33 PM
The Devil's Boneyard
By John Cory
t r u t h o u t | Sunday, 26 May, 2002
"My enemy is hopelessness, my ally honest doubt...
It's not enough to be alive when your future's been deferred."
- Harry Chapin -
Digging up the dead is a cheap trick of politicians to manipulate the living. The end goal being to control public opinion, squash dissent, and stymie the real purpose of exhumation - forthright forensic investigation.
The only thing more ludicrous than the hideous photo gambit to turn catastrophe into cash-flow, is the corporate media that enables the destruction of democracy through its own self-inflated celebrity and unctuous utterings. Just what is the picture of a "leader" flying away from the fury and sorrow of disaster really worth? And how do you describe it profitably?
While the GOP elite wine and dine pay-for-play "pioneers," America starves for truth and gags on the putrid spin of the punditocracy and jingo-journalism. This same conglomerate of politburo-puppeteers cries foul when held to any ethical expectations, while it derides what it calls "citizen journalism" from such lie detectors as: truthout.com - mediawhoresonline.com - buzzflash.com - bartcop.com - forgetting that citizen journalists and "pamphleteers" like Ben Franklin and Tom Paine helped forge the very essence of American democracy.
But now it is all slipping through their greedy little fingers. Even as this cabal of self-enriching special interests dig hard and deep to bury America in silk-lined corporate coffins, ordinary citizens scratch and claw for the fresh air of truth and justice.
That is the problem with digging in the devil's boneyard - there are skeletons everywhere and the often hoped for ressurection - becomes the night of the living dead.
Like the Tell-Tale Heart, entombment cannot still the beating pulse of truth and justice and democracy. Bush Inc. is now ranting and shouting like Poe's character: "Oh God! what could I do? I foamed --I raved --I swore! I swung the chair upon which I had been sitting, and grated it upon the boards, but the noise arose over all and continually increased. It grew louder --louder --louder! ... Almighty God! --no, no! They heard! --they suspected! --they knew! --they were making a mockery of my horror!-this I thought, and this I think. But anything was better than this agony! Anything was more tolerable than this derision! ... I felt that I must scream or die! and now --again! --hark! louder! louder! louder! louder!"
They cannot stop it as it draws closer with each new dawn. They cannot discount the dream of America, bought and paid for by men of gallantry not greed. The truth will not be denied. This arrogant aristocracy cannot close the door on democracy. It is coming. The rumblings of discontent and angry murmurs demand accountability. It is coming.
Can you see it - that haunting gaze of betrayal that stares back from the mirror? The eyes of the displaced and discarded peer back at you as the dead whisper "Why?"
Can you smell it - the rotting inky mendacious pulp piled on your doorstep? The foment of truth bubbles above the aroma of your arrogance and slogans of slander.
Can you taste it - that bitter-sweet success of thievery has now become a "cookie full of arsenic" that fills your mouth with the acid bile of democracy in decay?
Can you feel it -the festering heat of infection about to erupt?
Can you hear it -the crackling electrical charge of truth denied?
It is coming. Ssshhhh - listen. Can you hear it? America is calling. Pass it on.
© : t r u t h o u t 2002
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 2:28 PM
Friday, May 24, 2002
May 25, 2002
Thanks for the Heads-Up
By FRANK RICH
Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ridge, Mueller. Is there anyone who has not warned us of Armageddon over the past week? As far as I can tell, the only slacker in this White House game of Wag the Dog is Spot.
You don't have to be a cynic to believe that the point of the warnings is not to save lives so much as political hides. After all, we can't go about our daily business much differently just because of these dire pronouncements. Nor have they budged the Homeland Security Office's color-coded "threat level" from its weaselly yellow. What this orchestrated chorus of Cassandras can do is guarantee that we duly credit the Bush administration for giving us a heads-up should disaster strike between now and Election Day 2004. Not so incidentally, the new warnings also help facilitate our amnesia about the fracas over how low a priority Al Qaeda was for the White House before Sept. 11.
To see how low, there's no need to learn what was in that top-secret briefing that the president received as he settled down for his monthlong vacation at his Texas ranch on Aug. 6. Reports at the time show that Mr. Bush broke off from work early and spent most of that day fishing. If he had received foreknowledge of an attack that morning, he would have acted upon it, and no Democratic leader has said otherwise (despite Dick Cheney's smears to the contrary).
But that's not the end of the story. A far more revealing indication of the administration's mañana mindset about terrorism comes a month later, on Sept. 9, when Donald Rumsfeld threatened a presidential veto if Congress moved $600 million out of the White House's prized ballistic missile defense system and into counterterrorism. On Sept. 10, John Ashcroft submitted a final Justice Department budget request calling for increases in 68 programs, none of them directly related to combating terrorism.
In this somnolent walkup to Sept. 11, the Bush administration was hardly alone. The terrorism alarm went off loudly in the United States nine years ago — on Feb. 26, 1993, the first attack on the World Trade Center. The Clinton administration, Congress, the press and every government agency entrusted with our security can share responsibility for the subsequent on-again-off-again focus on a network of imaginative killers whose leader, motives, ambitions, potential targets and, as Condoleezza Rice might say, non-traditional hijacking schemes have long been a matter of fact and theory on the public record.
That's history, and no amount of spin from either Bush or Clinton apologists is going to rewrite it. That's also why the question of what the president knew about terrorism on Sept. 11, though important, is hardly the most pressing now, Washington hysteria notwithstanding. Nearly nine months have passed since the day that was supposed to change everything, and Osama bin Laden and most of his top associates, Mullah Omar included, have not been found, dead or alive. The most important question is not how ready we were to fight terrorism on Sept. 11, 2001, but how ready we are to do so as of Memorial Day weekend 2002.
Even the administration's own answers are not reassuring. Asked by Tim Russert last Sunday if the kind of noise that our intelligence is picking up from Al Qaeda this spring is "similar" to the noise prior to Sept. 11, Vice President Cheney answered, "Sure." If that's the case, it's clear that Ari Fleischer's reassurance to the press in February that Al Qaeda has been "severely disrupted and severely hampered" is now inoperative. Further evidence comes from French and German investigators pursuing the car bombings that killed 31 in Tunisia and Pakistan this month and last. One French official told The Times last week that Al Qaeda, now regrouping in the western provinces of our new ally, Pakistan, has sent "a warning for the West — you have not won the war, we are in a position to fight, when we want, where we want."
We are the richest, most can-do country in the world, but at home we're pursuing the war on terrorism with a management style that's pure Kmart. Back in October Mr. Bush declared that his new director of homeland security, Tom Ridge, in charge of coordinating some 70 federal agencies and countless local ones, would "have the full attention and complete support of the very highest levels of our government." Nine months later, Mr. Ridge has neither. What he does have is a new, less-than-high-tech headquarters, with an aboveground Washington address that can be taken out simultaneously with the White House.
The nation's nuclear plants are vulnerable from the air. Its borders are porous to malevolent visitors and matériel (only 2 percent of incoming ship cargo is inspected). The anthrax manhunt is stalled and there has been scant progress in the supposed push to bring local hospitals up to speed in identifying and countering bioterrorism. The I.N.S.'s failure to coordinate with the Social Security Administration, The Times' Robert Pear reports, is still allowing tens of thousands of foreigners to secure illegal Social Security numbers and concoct the fake identities that proved so useful to some of the Sept. 11 hijackers.
Remember Argenbright, the rent-a-guard company that was found to have employed convicts and illegal aliens to enforce airport security? It's still manning the fort in five major airports, from Orlando to O'Hare, where it no doubt continues to do a crack job of strip-searching little old ladies. This week USA Today reported that the new Transportation Security Administration has failed to fix the known security flaws that could allow the easy planting of bombs in the virtually unscreened cargo on passenger jets; the paper also found evidence that the same agency is cutting back on marksmanship training for the federal air marshals it is hiring to do the shooting it prohibits for pilots. As for the airport bomb-detecting machines mandated by Congress, The Wall Street Journal finds 190 in place, with a mere 1,100 still to go.
No classified documents are required to connect these dots. The administration is so fearful that someone will do so that it impugns the patriotism of those who try. No wonder Mr. Bush is fighting Democrats and Republicans alike — an ideological spectrum running from Tom Daschle to William Kristol — who call for an independent commission to investigate what went wrong in both his White House and Bill Clinton's before Sept. 11. The administration knows that inevitably such a commission, proposed in December by John McCain and Joe Lieberman, will provide a road map to what has not been fixed in the nine months since. As a decoy, Mr. Cheney is instead boasting of administration support for a Congressional investigation that has already been hobbled and delayed by political squabbling, false starts and Justice Department and C.I.A. lollygagging. That Congressional investigation, run by intelligence oversight committees that are themselves part of the pre-Sept. 11 failure, promises to be as effective as Congress's pursuit of Whitewater.
But as we need some version of a Warren Commission to get to the bottom of what went wrong, so we need an inverted Manhattan Project (one that will stop a bomb rather than build one) to recruit America's best minds to set things right. Mr. Ridge, a decent politician with no expertise in intelligence or counterterrorism, is a frivolous choice for security czar. Mr. Ashcroft, an aspiring J. Edgar Hoover isolated from reality by a circle of cronies, lacks the intellect and leadership ability to take on an adversary as cunning as Osama bin Laden. What he cares about most is maximizing his own power, and not just over civil liberties. His Justice Department has joined in the effort to block Mr. Ridge from consolidating the four overlapping agencies in charge of watching American borders. Now we learn, with the news of his suppression of the F.B.I. Phoenix memo, that Mr. Ashcroft will even cut the president out of the loop of law-enforcement embarrassments occurring on his watch.
With all the talent in this country and all that's at stake, is this the best we can muster? Addressing a meeting of emergency workers from around the country in New York this week, Thomas Von Essen, the fire commissioner of Sept. 11, said that politicians were "not making the tough decisions" and feared that "we will be standing here crying over police officers and firefighters and civilians next year, this year maybe." His views were echoed by Richard Sheirer, the Giuliani director of emergency management: "We can't let complacency set in, and I think it has already." Given that the history of Al Qaeda tells us that its major attacks are separated by intervals of 12 to 24 months, we'll find out soon enough.
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 9:14 PM
Wednesday, May 22, 2002
You gotta love Cheney's Buddies
Week of May 22 - 28, 2002
Army Chief Feels Heat, Scrubs Enron Bio
The Incredible Shrinking Résumé of Thomas White
by Russ Kick
homas White used to be proud of his résumé. When he was appointed secretary of the army last May, his online bio boasted about his 11 years as a senior exec at Enron. Then that nest of thieves collapsed, and suddenly it wasn't so cool to have been a big shot there. It was time to apply some serious splotches of white-out to White's life. Swiftly, quietly, the official biography for the army's top dog was changed, but cybersleuths soon unearthed the original. Until the military wises up enough to destroy the page, you can find it for yourself; it's squirreled away at www.hqda.army.mil/secarmy/biography.htm.
No longer posted for the broader public on the army's Web site, the document could serve as a kind of primer for the senators who'll soon hear White's testimony about the energy trader's downfall. The record begins by explaining White's new responsibilities. It then quickly jumps into a two-paragraph recap of his Enron glory days:
Prior to his appointment as Secretary of the Army, Secretary White served as Vice Chairman of Enron Energy Services, the Enron Corporation subsidiary responsible for providing energy outsource solutions to commercial and industrial customers throughout the United States. Mr. White was responsible for the delivery component of energy management services, which included commodity management; purchasing, maintaining and operating energy assets; developing and implementing energy information services; capital management; and facilities management.
Secretary White also served as a member of Enron's Executive Committee and was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer for Enron Operations Corporation. He was also responsible for the Enron Engineering and Construction Company, which managed an extensive construction portfolio with domestic and international projects.
Sometime after Enron tanked, that glowing report went the way of a California city in an Enron-sponsored blackout. Visitors to the army's site are no longer regaled with details of White's corporate prowess. Instead, at www.army.mil/leaders/Secarmy/bio.htm, they read this: "From 1990 to 2001, Mr. White was employed by Enron Corporation and held various senior executive positions."
The Enron material has not only been shrunk to tiny proportions, but it has also been shoved down to the very last sentence, where it sits as nothing more than a lonely afterthought.
Reached for comment, Charles Krohn, the deputy chief of public affairs for the army (and former next-door neighbor of White), said, "I don't know what the company answer is. But I think it's the obvious one. After what happened with Enron, his experience doesn't seem relevant. But it would be disingenuous, if not dishonest, to take out all Enron references."
Besides the general taint of being associated with a company that screwed its employees, stockholders, and consumers while executives stuffed their pockets with cash, White has many specific reasons to downplay his role.
As a bigwig with Enron, he set up deals to supply the army with electricity. As head of the army, he immediately spoke of the need to further privatize the army's utilities. Enron must've been salivating.
Further, White failed to divest himself of all Enron holdings as quickly as he told the Senate he would during his confirmation hearings. In March, the Senate Armed Services Committee strongly rebuked him for it: "Based on the information we have received from you . . . and from the Office of Government Ethics, we do not believe that your actions satisfied the requirements of this committee."
White finally got around to selling his stock at the end of last October, five months into his tenure as head of the army. Funny thing is, during that same month, he documented talking to his old buds at Enron—either on the phone or face-to-face—13 times. October 2001, you may recall, is the month that Enron started to go belly up. Naturally, White denies they talked about the company's impending doom before he dumped his stock.
Not everyone is buying his story, though. Both the FBI and the Securities and Exchange Commission are investigating his contacts with his former cronies.
But it gets even better.
In early May, the world got to see an internal memo in which Enron's lawyers revealed ways to manipulate the California energy market and jack up prices—creating phony congestion, skirting price caps, etc. The media had a field day reporting on the plans, known by names like "Death Star," "Get Shorty," and "Ricochet." What they didn't mention was that the corporate division where White was "responsible" had been directly involved in these maneuverings. Enron Energy Services was, in fact, the only division specifically named in the smoking-gun memo. What's more, the skullduggery was happening while White was in the hands-on position of vice chairman.
Research by the Nader-affiliated Public Citizen shows that during the first three months of 2001, Enron Energy Services traded millions of megawatts of electricity with other divisions of Enron, artificially jacking up the prices to as much as $2500 per megawatt hour (compared to the average price of $340 at the time). "As vice chairman," the nonprofit watchdog notes, "White was in charge of running day-to-day operations, including managing and signing retail energy contracts." The results for California were rolling blackouts and sky-high prices. The results for White were much better. "As a direct result of his division's fraud, White is a multimillionaire," says Public Citizen.
Now White has been called to testify before the Senate about Enron's shenanigans in California. He agreed to appear and has said that Enron Energy Services didn't engage in manipulation. But the mere specter of him sitting before lawmakers provides a solid sign that the Enron scandal is reaching high into the Bush administration.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We shouldn't forget that White has problems not relating to Enron. There was that little jaunt he took last spring on a government plane to sell some of his real estate in Colorado. And he fought hard for the Crusader, which pissed off Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who had decided that the mobile artillery system had to go. During a recent press conference, Rumsfeld trotted out White to shamefacedly say he supports the decision to can the Crusader. The Daily Enron, a Web journal, later noted, "One reporter there said he looked like a POW being forced to read a confession while tapping out an SOS with his eyelids."
Is White on his way out? Official army flacks deny it, but that's certainly the scuttlebutt. Time magazine reports that after the press conference, "folks close to White began hinting that the Army Secretary might leave in a few weeks." USA Today quotes senior Pentagon officials saying that the army man "is likely to be forced out of his post."
If so, White's official bio will have to be changed again—his brief tenure as head of the army could easily be shrunk to a single sentence.
Tell us what you think. editor@villagevoice.com E-mail this story to a friend.
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 8:10 PM
May 23, 2002
White House Acknowledges More Contacts With Enron
By RICHARD A. OPPEL Jr.
ASHINGTON, May 22 — White House officials had more extensive contacts with Enron executives in 2001 than previously disclosed, according to a document released by the Bush administration today in response to a request for information from a Senate committee.
The contacts — including meetings, telephone conversations, letters and e-mail messages — concerned the national energy policy report produced by Vice President Dick Cheney, the California energy crisis, Enron's collapse last fall and appointments to administration positions, including the chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
The White House document also disclosed that Kenneth L. Lay, the former Enron chairman, or other company executives attended numerous White House functions, including the 2001 inaugural, the Easter Egg roll, T-ball games, speeches and social events.
The release of the information came hours after a deeply divided Senate panel voted to issue two subpoenas to the White House for information about contacts with Enron, with Democrats accusing the White House of resisting earlier requests for information and Republicans suggesting that the move was politically motivated.
The White House document released today was prepared in response to an earlier request for information from the Governmental Affairs Committee, whose chairman is Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut, the former Democratic vice presidential nominee. While it came after the subpoena was issued, it was not a legal response to it.
Aides to Mr. Lieberman said tonight that after a brief review of the document, the panel regards it as short of the information being sought.
"It appears the White House is still providing only what it thinks is relevant, rather than what the committee asked for," said Leslie Phillips, a spokeswoman for the committee. "We just don't know if the information is everything they collected, or just what they're willing to tell us. This would not have in any way averted a subpoena."
The Governmental Affairs Committee voted 9 to 8 along party lines this morning to issue the subpoenas after more than an hour's debate. That included a heated exchange between Mr. Lieberman and Senator Thad Cochran, Republican of Mississippi.
The subpoenas were the first issued by Congress to the executive branch in the continuing inquiry into Enron's collapse and are likely to be resisted by the White House, which has frequently complained that Congress is encroaching on its executive power and constitutional prerogatives.
In another battle with Congress over the same kind of issue, the Justice Department sought today to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the General Accounting Office seeking to obtain records of meetings last year between energy industry executives and Vice President Cheney's energy task force.
The Justice Department's motion in federal district court here argues that the G.A.O. is trying to "improperly inject itself and the courts into the president's exercise of his powers." The G.A.O.'s legal position, the Justice Department argued, "would revolutionize and violate the separation of powers doctrine that has made our nation's government so strong."
A spokesman for the G.A.O. declined to comment, citing the pending litigation.
The subpoenas, delivered this afternoon to the offices of the president and vice president, call for all communications, including records of White House visits, between Enron and the White House since 1992 that in any way deal with eight federal agencies, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
In addition, the subpoenas seek records of contacts between the White House and officials at the eight federal agencies regarding Enron. They also seek records of contacts between Enron and the White House over the formulation of the national energy policy, covering similar ground as the G.A.O., except that the accounting office is also seeking records of contacts with other energy companies.
The subpoenas demand that information be turned over by June 5. The White House called the action unnecessary today, but did not immediately say whether it would contest the subpoenas. A spokeswoman said White House officials were "rather perplexed" that the panel "has taken this highly unusual step to issue subpoenas without having reviewed" material the White House planned to turn over to the committee this evening.
Democrats on the committee said the White House had been dragging its feet since nearly two months ago, when the panel sent its first letter seeking the Enron-related information.
"It's clear to me that there is a very determined decision not to respond to substantial parts of the committee's request for information," Mr. Lieberman said. "At the least, it's slow walking; at the worst, it's stonewalling."
But Republicans, led by Senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee, the ranking minority member of the committee, called the move premature and said there was no reason to burden the White House with a subpoena when the administration was preoccupied with the war against terrorism and even Democrats on the panel agreed there had been no suggestion of White House wrongdoing related to Enron's collapse.
The debate in the committee intensified after Mr. Cochran suggested that the subpoenas were a politically motivated fishing expedition intended to smear the White House.
"It makes me wonder, are we doing this to attract the attention of the public by suggesting" that the White House has some involvement? Mr. Cochran said. "It makes me very suspicious," he said, adding that the panel was seeking so much information from the White House that "if you got everything you asked for, you wouldn't know what to do with it."
In a sharp voice, Mr. Lieberman quickly responded to the "personal" criticism, telling Mr. Cochran, "Your suspicions are unwarranted, and in my opinion unfair."
In a letter tonight to Mr. Lieberman, the White House counsel, Alberto R. Gonzales, referring to the president's office, said, "Our inquiries thus far have disclosed no instance in which Enron approached any person within the E.O.P. or the office of the vice president seeking help in connection with its financial difficulties prior to bankruptcy."
"In addition," Mr. Gonzales said, "the communications we have identified thus far reflect only appropriate and responsible actions by government officials."
The seven-page document, released by the White House this evening, illustrates how Enron officials approached many people in the Bush administration with specific requests or to discuss specific topics, like electricity policies, tax credits for wind power, the California energy crisis, and legislation governing power-plant pollutants. It also shows that Mr. Lay recommended 21 people for jobs in the administration, though only 3 ultimately received appointments.
The document lists at least 19 meetings between White House and Enron officials — including five meetings with Vice President Cheney's energy task force — and at least 10 phone calls. The actual number cannot be determined, as contacts with some White House officials are described as "a few communications" or as a "small number of telephone calls."
The information includes a number of contacts already disclosed, like a a half-hour meeting on April 17, 2001, between Mr. Lay and Mr. Cheney to talk about "energy policy and the energy crisis in California."
It also lists phone calls that Mr. Lay made to Karl Rove, Mr. Bush's senior political adviser, urging the appointment of Patrick Wood III and Nora Brownell to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Both were eventually appointed, but in some crucial matters they have backed policies that Enron fought hard to defeat.
The document also summarizes calls Mr. Lay made to senior administration officials seeking assistance as Enron was collapsing late last year, and it details the internal debate in the administration about the company's problems. The White House has always said it did not do anything to intervene on Enron's behalf.
But the information released tonight does disclose at least a dozen new meetings or phone calls related to energy policy or issues of significant importance to Enron, mostly with three White House officials: Robert McNally, a special assistant to the president for economic policy, whose name had not been previously disclosed by the administration as having any contact with Enron; Lawrence B. Lindsey, the chairman of the National Economic Council; and Steve Ruhlen, the deputy assistant to the vice president for legislative affairs.
For example, it says that "Dr. Lindsey had a few communications with Ken Lay in the winter and spring of 2001, most likely about the California energy shortage."
At the time, Enron was aggressively fighting efforts to impose limits on soaring power prices in California. Administration officials came out against the price caps, but President Bush's two appointees to FERC, Mr. Wood and Ms. Brownell, supported a move last summer to impose price limits across the western United States that California officials credit with helping bring prices under control.
On April 6, 2001, Mr. Lindsey also attended a meeting with Mr. Lay, Mr. McNally and several other Enron and White House officials to discuss "electricity and bundling issues," the latter a reference to aspects of electricity deregulation. "Mr. Lay also talked to Mr. Lindsey after the attacks on Sept. 11 to state that confidence and investment plans were deteriorating in the wake of the attacks." The White House said Enron did not ask Mr. Lindsey for help as it collapsed last fall.
Without elaborating, the document also says that Mr. Lindsey "may have mentioned Enron in passing in explaining an economic concept relating to the electricity grid" during a meeting with Andrew Card, the White House chief of staff. The rules governing the nation's electricity were a crucial policy issue for Enron, which sought to have the federal government wrest more control of the grid away from state utility commissions.
Mr. McNally appeared to have had even more contact with Enron officials, including seven meetings in 2001. "The main issues discussed in these communications were multi-emissions policy (Enron supported four-pollutant legislation on power plants) and electricity policy," the White House document said. Of the seven meetings, one, which included the director of the energy task force, had already been disclosed, and another was the April 6 meeting that also included Mr. Lindsey.
In the months before the energy policy report was released last May, Mr. Ruhlen "received a small number of telephone calls" from Pat Shortridge, whom the White House identified as an Enron governmental affairs official and personal friend of Mr. Ruhlen.
In the calls, Mr. Shortridge was seeking "information concerning the likely components of the president's energy plan." The calls were similar to others Mr. Ruhlen had with other energy executives, and in them he "disclaimed knowledge" of details of the plan, the White House said.
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company | Permissions | Privacy Policy
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 8:00 PM
t r u t h o u t | Statement
Sharon Buccino / Rob Perks
Natural Resources Defense Council
Chevron Helped Dictate U.S. Energy Policy
Bush Administration's Energy Task Force Adopted
Several of the Oil Company's Recommendations
WASHINGTON (May 22, 2002) - Among the roughly 1,500 additional documents from the Energy Department related to Vice President Cheney's energy task force, NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) has uncovered evidence showing the Bush administration implemented energy policies requested by Chevron Corporation. The company provided several recommendations, ranging from easing federal permitting rules for energy projects to relaxing standards fuel supply requirements, which ultimately were included in the president's national energy plan.
NRDC unexpectedly received these documents late last night, 41 days after the final court deadline for their release. According to Sharon Buccino, NRDC senior attorney, "The administration has unlawfully delayed the release of some of the most embarrassing evidence of industry involvement in the Bush energy plan."
In a February 5, 2002, letter to President George Bush and copied to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, Chevron CEO David J. O'Reilly recommends four short-term actions the administration should take to "eliminate federal barriers to increased energy supplies." The energy task force - officially known as the National Energy Policy Development Group (NEPDG) - included Chevron's recommendations in its report to President Bush on May 17, 2001. Examples follow:
Permitting for Energy Projects
Chevron Recommendation: "Charge the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator to identify and address federal barriers to permitting energy projects (e.g. projects to develop new supplies of energy, and projects that produce cleaner transportation fuels)..."
Task Force Recommendations: "The NEPD Group recommends the President issue an Executive Order to rationalize permitting for energy production in an environmentally sound manner by directing federal agencies to expedite permits and other federal actions necessary for energy-related project approvals on a national basis. This order would establish an inter-agency task force chaired by the Council on Environmental Quality to ensure that federal agencies responsible for permitting energy-related facilities are coordinating their efforts. The task force will ensure that federal agencies set up appropriate mechanisms to coordinate federal, state, tribal, and local permitting activity in particular regions where increased activity is expected.
"The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Secretary of Energy to take steps to ensure America has adequate refining capacity to meet the needs of consumers.
* Provide more regulatory certainty to refinery owners and streamline the permitting process where possible to ensure that regulatory overlap is limited.
* Adopt comprehensive regulations (covering more than one pollutant and requirement) and consider the rules' cumulative impacts and benefits.
"The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the Secretary of Energy and other relevant agencies, to review New Source Review regulations, including administrative interpretation and implementation, and report to the President within 90 days on the impact of the regulations on investment in new utility and refinery generation capacity, energy efficiency, and environmental protection."
"Boutique" Fuel Requirements
Chevron Recommendation: "Promote legislation to address the balkanization of transportation fuels. Recent federal, state and local regulations have led to a patchwork of boutique fuel requirements, which have contributed to supply constraints and increased fuel costs. Comprehensive energy legislation should address the regulatory requirements affecting the nation's motor fuel supply. A federal plan should be developed to move the U.S. to nationwide performance-based standards for gasoline and diesel fuels."
Task Force Recommendation: "The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Administrator of the EPA to study opportunities to maintain or improve the environmental benefits of state and local 'boutique' clean fuel programs while exploring ways to increase the flexibility of the fuels distribution infrastructure, improve fungibility, and provide added gasoline market liquidity. In concluding this study, the Administrator shall consult with the Departments of Energy and Agriculture, and other agencies as needed."
Offshore Oil Exploration - Gulf of Mexico
Chevron Recommendation: "Proceed with domestic energy development, including Lease Sale 181 in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico scheduled for later this year. This announcement would complement and reinforce your support to open ANWR, and demonstrate a commitment to reject unjustified opposition to new energy leasing and development."
Task Force Recommendations: "The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Secretary of the Interior to consider economic incentives for environmentally sound offshore oil and gas development where warranted by specific circumstances: explore opportunities for royalty reductions, consistent with ensuring a fair return to the public where warranted for enhanced oil and gas recovery; for reduction of risk associated with production in frontier areas or deep gas formations; and for development of small fields that would otherwise be uneconomic.
"The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Secretaries of Commerce and Interior to re-examine the current federal legal and policy regime (statutes, regulations, and Executive Orders) to determine if changes are needed regarding energy-related activities and the siting of energy facilities in the coastal zone and on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS).
"The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Secretary of the Interior continue OCS oil and gas leasing and approval of exploration and development plans on predictable schedules."
Trade Sanctions
Chevron Recommendation: "Oppose any attempt to reinstate the Iran-Libya Sanctions Act (ILSA) which sunsets on August 5, 2001, and consider lifting or modifying the current Executive Order that prohibits U.S. companies from doing business with Iran. U.S. energy policy should recognize the global nature of energy supply, and the role that foreign countries play in our nation's energy security. We urge your administration to support U.S. based companies efforts to expand and diversify the supply of energy throughout the world. This includes your support for eliminating ineffective, unilateral trade sanctions and promoting open trading relationships."
NEPDG Recommendation: "The NEPD Group recommends that the President direct the Secretaries of State, Treasury, and Commerce to initiate a comprehensive review of sanctions. Energy security should be one of the factors considered in such a review."
-------
**Click Here to View Chevron's Letters (pdf format)
The Bush administration's National Energy Policy Report is on the Web at: www.fe.doe.gov/general/energypolicy.shtml .
Other documents reveal key involvement by the National Mining Association, the National Petroleum & Refiners Association, General Motors and other major industries in the development of the Bush energy plan.
As part of its ongoing efforts to obtain additional energy task force documents that the administration continues to withhold, NRDC will be back in federal court tomorrow.
© : t r u t h o u t 2002
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 7:57 PM
U.S. issues new warnings on terror
White House tries to counter Bush's critics
By DOUG SAUNDERS
Tuesday, May 21, 2002 ? Print Edition, Page A11
As U.S. officials continued to issue warnings yesterday about the
possibility of attacks by suicide bombers and terrorists, the White
House quietly acknowledged that the threats are not urgent and that
they
are partly motivated by political objectives.
FBI director Robert Mueller told an audience of lawyers that the United
States is likely some day to experience Israel-style suicide bombings,
while the Immigration and Naturalization Service warned that it is
unable to keep track of potential terrorists holding student visas.
"There will be another terrorist attack. We will not be able to stop
it," Mr. Mueller told a gathering of prosecutors in Virginia. "It's
something we all live with."
However, White House officials told reporters that the blunt warnings
issued yesterday and Sunday do not reflect a dramatic increase in
threatening information but rather a desire to fend off criticism from
the Democrats.
Last week, Democrats criticized the Republican administration for its
failure to warn Americans about al-Qaeda terrorism in the months before
the Sept. 11 attacks.
A senior administration official with knowledge of U.S. intelligence
said yesterday that the new warnings, issued by Vice-President Dick
Cheney on Sunday and by Mr. Mueller yesterday, are designed to give
Americans better notice and to protect President George W. Bush against
second-guessing in the event of another attack.
A top White House aide said that last week's criticism prompted a
two-pronged political response: Mr. Bush accused Democrats of playing
politics with the issue while his advisers reminded voters that the
United States is still a target.
Although reports of communications among suspected al-Qaeda members
have
increased in recent weeks, the White House has not elevated its level
of
alert from "code yellow" and has no plan to do so, several officials
said. Yellow means there is a significant risk of attack, a status that
has remained unchanged since the colour code was established in
mid-March.
"In response to what you heard over the weekend, I would say [the
threats are] relatively non-specific and we are watching it extremely
closely," said Lieutenant-General Gregory Newbold, senior planning
officer on the U.S. military's Joint Staff.
Nevertheless, the United States was rife with warnings yesterday that
its buildings, borders and facilities are still vulnerable to terror
attacks. Owners of apartment buildings were warned again to look out
for
suspicious tenants, and officials in Orlando, Fla., and New York City
cautioned that their drinking-water systems are highly vulnerable.
According to The New York Times, thousands of foreigners have illegally
obtained Social Security numbers, a form of identity fraud that would
allow terrorists to live undetected within U.S. borders for long
periods.
At the same time, the Immigration and Naturalization Service said in a
180-page report that its system of keeping track of student-visa
holders
is "riddled with inaccuracies," gathered using procedures that are
"untimely and significantly flawed," and that the records of visa
holders are "incomplete and unreliable." Several of the Sept. 11
terrorists used student visas to enter the United States. The INS said
its new, more secure computer system will not be ready by January, as
originally scheduled.
Yesterday, members of the Senate intelligence committee reiterated Mr.
Cheney's warnings about terror attacks in the future, while toning down
his rhetoric by saying that such attacks could take place months or
years from now.
"I believe it's going to come," Republican Senator Richard Shelby of
Alabama said. "Now, whether you mean by imminent, is it going to happen
today, tomorrow or two years? We're not sure."
Other officials and politicians said al-Qaeda is not the only Islamic
terror group capable of launching attacks against the United States.
"Our enemy is not al-Qaeda alone," Democratic Senator Bob Graham of
Florida said. "There are several international terrorist groups which
have abilities, in some cases greater abilities, than al-Qaeda and a
similar desire to attack the United States." He pointed to Hezbollah
and
the Egyptian Islamic Jihad as two groups with both the capabilities and
the desire to attack.
Victoria Clark, a spokeswoman for the Defence Department, reiterated
this point, arguing in a press briefing that the end of the war in
Afghanistan does not mark a decline in terrorist threats. "We have
always said this is about more than one person, one network, and
certainly is about more than Afghanistan."
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 7:55 PM
Cheney has oil in his veins and anthracite for a heart
Cheney Breaks Tie in Senate Trade Vote - Denies Mortgage Breaks for Unemployed
By Reuters | New York Times
May 21, 2002
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Vice President Dick Cheney on Tuesday cast a rare vote in the Senate to kill an amendment to provide displaced workers with short-term, low-interest loans to help cover their monthly mortgage payments.
Cheney broke a 49-49 tie to kill the amendment offered to the trade promotion authority bill, which already contains an expansion of benefits for workers who have lost their jobs because of imports or overseas factory relocations.
The Bush administration said the amendment offered by Sen. George Allen, a Virginia Republican, raised significant concerns because it would expand federal "trade adjustment assistance" programs into a new area.
Those programs traditionally have focused on retraining and other assistance to help laid off workers find new jobs.
The amendment would have allowed the Labor Department to offer loans at a 4 percent interest rate to help displaced workers make their mortgage payments for 12 months. The program was capped at $10 million annually for five years.
Allen said it would help textile and apparel workers in his state who have lost their jobs because of foreign competition hold onto their homes.
However, many Republicans have balked at adding any more benefits for unemployed workers to the trade bill.
A spokeswoman for Allen said the senator was not surprised by the Bush administration's effort to defeat the measure. "We knew that they had concerns," the aide said.
Trade promotion authority would boost Bush's ability to negotiate major new trade agreements.
Allen still plans to vote for the bill, despite losing on his amendment, the spokeswoman said.
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 7:49 PM
Monday, May 20, 2002
Go To Original
Cheney Moves to Block 9-11 Probe
By Alison Mitchell
May 20, 2002
WASHINGTON, May 19 -- Vice President Dick Cheney said today that he would advise President Bush not to turn over to Congress the August intelligence briefing that warned that terrorists were interested in hijacking airplanes, and he insisted that the investigation into Sept. 11 should be handled by the Congressional intelligence committees, not an independent commission.
In appearances on several television news programs, Mr. Cheney said "it would be a mistake" to give broad Congressional access to the Aug. 6 memorandum to the president, which ignited a political uproar over whether the nation could have anticipated the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
"That presidential daily brief is developed from some of our most secret operations and it has to be treated that way," Mr. Cheney said on "Meet the Press" on NBC. "It's never been provided to the Congress before, to my knowledge."
Mr. Cheney acknowledged a need for a Congressional inquiry to examine the workings of the intelligence agencies, saying, "There are lessons to be learned" from Sept. 11.
But in opposing a special commission or multiple investigations, the vice president said, "most of what we need to talk about here should not be talked about in open hearings."
Mr. Cheney did, however, leave open the possibility of some kind of "conversation" with senior members of the intelligence committees "to satisfy their concerns" about the details of the Aug. 6 memorandum to the president.
The debate over how to investigate Sept. 11 is unique because it involves secret intelligence and a devastating loss of life, and comes against a backdrop of further terror threats. Yet in some ways it is part of a broader battle being waged day by day between a Congress eager for oversight and an administration that believes that presidential authority and prerogatives have been eroded since the Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal.
The struggle is on an array of fronts, including the dispute over whether Tom Ridge, the homeland security director, will testify before Congress, the lawsuit by the General Accounting Office to get information about Mr. Cheney's energy task force, and the latest threats by a Senate committee to subpoena the Bush administration for information about its contacts with Enron, the collapsed energy trading company.
At the same time, Mr. Bush has been aggressive about using his unilateral powers ‹ creating military tribunals, for example, through a presidential order rather than seeking legislation from Congress.
Some scholars see the conflict as a significant new chapter in the struggle over the balance of powers.
"I think this is another swing of the cycle," Robert Dallek, a presidential historian, said.
"After Watergate and after the end of the cold war, I think Congress reasserted itself," he said. "I think that, in fact, Bill Clinton's impeachment will be remembered by historians as the high point of post-cold-war Congressional assertiveness. No elected president had ever been impeached."
Some members of the administration are blunt about their view that Congress in recent decades has overstepped its bounds.
"There's no question that there's a recognition within the administration that the presidential authority has eroded over the years beyond the proper constitutional separation of powers," one senior administration official said. "And this is a matter of principle for the presidency."
Alberto R. Gonzales, the White House counsel, said in a recent interview that Mr. Bush was determined to make maximum use of presidential powers.
"The framers of the Constitution, I think, intended there to be a strong presidency in order to carry out certain functions," Mr. Gonzales said, "and he feels an obligation to leave the office in better shape than when he came in."
Congressional Democrats have bridled at assertions that the administration is protecting the institution of the presidency. They say the White House is trying to avoid scrutiny.
"Look, this administration, as I found in some of my other work in Congress, has a real penchant for secrecy," Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, a sponsor of legislation to create an independent commission to examine Sept. 11, said today.
"I found that in the investigation my committee is doing of Enron, where I think we're asking for some very reasonable information," Mr. Lieberman said on the ABC News program "This Week." "And the White House has so far stonewalled us." He has threatened to subpoena the Bush administration about its contacts with the company.
The struggle over the balance of powers comes after a long period in which Congress ‹ in reaction to abuses by the Central Intelligence Agency, to the escalation of the Vietnam War and to Watergate ‹ became more fierce about its involvement in foreign policy, more aggressive about oversight and investigations, and more protective of its powers of the purse.
Mr. Cheney recently spoke of 30 years of "continual encroachment by Congress in the executive branch, a weakening of the presidency."
Today, he brought up celebrated Congressional investigations into C.I.A. abuses and into the Iran-contra scandal of the Reagan years, as he pressed for the investigation of Sept. 11 to be conducted with discretion in regard to security.
Mr. Bush's drive to assert executive authority has intellectual roots stretching back several administrations. His father came into office after former President Ronald Reagan turned over to Congress and a special prosecutor thousands of documents concerning covert arms sales to Nicaraguan rebels, and allowed lawmakers investigating the Iran-contra affair to examine certain entries in his personal diaries.
C. Boyden Gray, who was White House counsel to President Bush's father, said that the first President Bush told him that he "wanted to leave the office a little more powerful when I left it," and he said the current administration felt the same way.
Mr. Cheney's views could be seen emerging as far back as 1987, in the minority report of the Congressional committee investigating the Iran-contra affair.
While the majority of the committee accused the Reagan administration of "secrecy, deception and disdain for law," Mr. Cheney and other Republican dissenters instead criticized the administration as letting Congress exert control over Central America policy, banning weapons sales to Nicaraguan rebels.
The effort to draw a new line with Congress is being waged by an administration that has in its ranks staff members who once worked for the Congressional committees and independent counsel investigations that chased Bill Clinton across his presidency. That too has drawn skepticism from Democrats.
"Some of these staffers when they worked on the Hill had no concern about asking about the private conversations of President Clinton and his staff or his attorney general and her staff," said Representative Henry A. Waxman, Democrat of California.
Yet these officials have not been loath to take on former allies. The administration had a confrontation with one of the Republican committee chairmen who most relentlessly pursued Mr. Clinton ‹ Representative Dan Burton, Republican of Indiana.
Mr. Bush asserted executive privilege when Mr. Burton's committee last year subpoenaed internal Justice Department documents, most of them concerning decisions on whether to prosecute in three decade-old organized crime cases in New England in which the false testimony of an agent from the Federal Bureau of Investigation sent four men to prison.
Assistant Attorney General Michael Chertoff said in an interview that such deliberative material on whether or not to prosecute "is one of the most fundamental executive functions under the Constitution."
Eventually, the administration let Mr. Burton's staff members scrutinize some of the New England documents.
The struggles look likely to intensify. In a signal that the administration may be willing to take the fight to the Supreme Court, the office of Solicitor General Theodore B. Olson is in the battle over what the accounting office, the investigative arm of Congress, can learn about Mr. Cheney's energy task force.
"What we are doing," Mr. Olson said in an interview, "is defending the prerogative of the president and vice president to receive advice in order to develop their own notions of what they might propose to Congress, and the importance to the president and to the vice president to be able to have those sources of information without having to disclose every conversation they ever had or every book they have ever read that helps generate ideas about what would be the best governmental policy."
This week, Mr. Burton's committee plans to open a new front ‹ a dispute over an executive order issued by President Bush last November to grant a sitting president, former president and family members an expansive privilege to block the release of past presidential records.
The committee is scheduled to vote on legislation sponsored by Representative Steve Horn, Republican of California which would largely rescind Mr. Bush's order.
Mr. Horn and other House members say it undercuts the post-Watergate-era Presidential Records Act of 1978, which created a presumption that unclassified records of former presidents belong to the public.
Mr. Cheney today made clear that the administration would oppose any effort to expand an investigation of Sept. 11 beyond the intelligence committees. "I think there's a trade-off here, frankly," he said, "between safeguarding the national interest, which is very much at stake here, and satisfying what sometimes becomes a search for headlines on Capitol Hill."
(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)
© : t r u t h o u t 2002
accesswater2030@yahoo.com 9:25 PM
/// ///
|
|
|