Katrina aid goes toward football condos | By Jay Reeves, Associated Press Writer | August 13, 2007
TUSCALOOSA, Ala. --With large swaths of the Gulf Coast still in ruins from Hurricane Katrina, rich federal tax breaks designed to spur rebuilding are flowing hundreds of miles inland to investors who are buying up luxury condos near the University of Alabama's football stadium.
...
While many of the buyers are Crimson Tide alumni or ardent football fans not entitled to any special Katrina-related tax breaks, many others are real estate investors who are purchasing the condos with plans to rent them out.
...
The GO Zone contains a variety of tax breaks designed to stimulate construction in Mississippi, Louisiana and Alabama. It offers tax-free bonds to developers to finance big commercial projects like shopping centers or hotels. It also allows real estate investors who buy condos or other properties in the GO Zone to take accelerated depreciation on their purchases when they file their taxes.
The GO Zone was drawn to include the Tuscaloosa area even though it is about 200 miles from the coast and got only heavy rain and scattered wind damage from Katrina. ...
Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Thursday, August 09, 2007
The Coconut Road money is a boon, however, to Daniel J. Aronoff, a real estate developer who helped raise $40,000 for Mr. Young ...
Alaskan Gets Campaign Cash; Florida Road Gets US Funds | By David D. Kirkpatrick | The New York Times | Tuesday 07 August 2007
...
... The road, a stretch of pavement near Fort Myers, Fla., that touches five golf clubs on its way to the Gulf of Mexico, is the target of a $10 million earmark that appeared mysteriously in a 2006 transportation bill written by Representative Don Young, Republican of Alaska.
Mr. Young, who last year steered more than $200 million to a so-called bridge to nowhere reaching 80 people on Gravina Island, Alaska, has no constituents in Florida.
The Republican congressman whose district does include Coconut Road says he did not seek the money. County authorities have twice voted not to use it, until Mr. Young and the district congressman wrote letters warning that a refusal could jeopardize future federal money for the county.
The Coconut Road money is a boon, however, to Daniel J. Aronoff, a real estate developer who helped raise $40,000 for Mr. Young at the nearby Hyatt Coconut Point hotel days before he introduced the measure.
Mr. Aronoff owns as much as 4,000 acres along Coconut Road. The $10 million in federal money would pay for the first steps to connect the road to Interstate 75, multiplying the value of Mr. Aronoff's land. ...
...
... The road, a stretch of pavement near Fort Myers, Fla., that touches five golf clubs on its way to the Gulf of Mexico, is the target of a $10 million earmark that appeared mysteriously in a 2006 transportation bill written by Representative Don Young, Republican of Alaska.
Mr. Young, who last year steered more than $200 million to a so-called bridge to nowhere reaching 80 people on Gravina Island, Alaska, has no constituents in Florida.
The Republican congressman whose district does include Coconut Road says he did not seek the money. County authorities have twice voted not to use it, until Mr. Young and the district congressman wrote letters warning that a refusal could jeopardize future federal money for the county.
The Coconut Road money is a boon, however, to Daniel J. Aronoff, a real estate developer who helped raise $40,000 for Mr. Young at the nearby Hyatt Coconut Point hotel days before he introduced the measure.
Mr. Aronoff owns as much as 4,000 acres along Coconut Road. The $10 million in federal money would pay for the first steps to connect the road to Interstate 75, multiplying the value of Mr. Aronoff's land. ...
Ike knew that infrastructure was important; military adventurism was dangerous and fiscal balance was common sense.
Thursday, August 9, 2007 by The Chicago Sun-Times | A Lot More Than One Bridge Could Crumble Under GOP | by Jesse Jackson
A 40-year-old bridge collapses into the Mississippi River in Minneapolis. Levees give way in New Orleans at the foot of the Mississippi. An 83-year-old steam pipe produces an eruption that terrorizes Manhattan. As our infrastructure literally crumbles beneath our feet, America is building the largest embassy compound in the world in Iraq — an area larger than the Pentagon — to manage a war now estimated to cost $1 trillion.
What happened at both ends of the Mississippi and is happening in cities across the country are tragedies, but they aren’t random accidents. They are the direct price of the right wing in power. Scornful of government, intent on cutting taxes and slashing spending, they systematically have shorted public investment in our basic infrastructure — in bridges and roads, in rail lines and air systems, in parks and schools.
The American Society of Civil Engineers gave America a D for its infrastructure in their most recent report in 2005. Ironically, bridges did better — a grade C — than sewers, water treatment and a range of other areas. In the report, more than one out of every four bridges in America were rated as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. Don’t think about that when you drive over your next bridge.
For over 25 years, we’ve cheated on public investment. ”Government,” Ronald Reagan preached, ”is not the solution. Government is the problem.” Activists like Grover Norquist took this to the extreme, saying, “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can . . . drown it in the bathtub.”
Norquist and his allies have bullied Republicans into signing a pledge never to raise taxes. In Minnesota, the conservative governor, Tim Pawlenty, campaigned against taxes and vetoed an appropriation bill that would have provided increased funds for highway and bridge repairs. Interstate 35’s Bridge 9340, rated structurally deficit by the U.S. Department of Transportation, had repairs on it postponed for a year.
One trillion dollars squandered in the debacle in Iraq. A clamp on vital investments here at home. Those are the stated priorities of modern-day conservatives — a far remove from those of President Dwight Eisenhower, who built the interstate highway system while putting a lid on military spending and balancing the budget. Ike knew that infrastructure was important; military adventurism was dangerous and fiscal balance was common sense. Modern-day conservatives have abandoned every part of his lessons. ...
A 40-year-old bridge collapses into the Mississippi River in Minneapolis. Levees give way in New Orleans at the foot of the Mississippi. An 83-year-old steam pipe produces an eruption that terrorizes Manhattan. As our infrastructure literally crumbles beneath our feet, America is building the largest embassy compound in the world in Iraq — an area larger than the Pentagon — to manage a war now estimated to cost $1 trillion.
What happened at both ends of the Mississippi and is happening in cities across the country are tragedies, but they aren’t random accidents. They are the direct price of the right wing in power. Scornful of government, intent on cutting taxes and slashing spending, they systematically have shorted public investment in our basic infrastructure — in bridges and roads, in rail lines and air systems, in parks and schools.
The American Society of Civil Engineers gave America a D for its infrastructure in their most recent report in 2005. Ironically, bridges did better — a grade C — than sewers, water treatment and a range of other areas. In the report, more than one out of every four bridges in America were rated as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. Don’t think about that when you drive over your next bridge.
For over 25 years, we’ve cheated on public investment. ”Government,” Ronald Reagan preached, ”is not the solution. Government is the problem.” Activists like Grover Norquist took this to the extreme, saying, “I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can . . . drown it in the bathtub.”
Norquist and his allies have bullied Republicans into signing a pledge never to raise taxes. In Minnesota, the conservative governor, Tim Pawlenty, campaigned against taxes and vetoed an appropriation bill that would have provided increased funds for highway and bridge repairs. Interstate 35’s Bridge 9340, rated structurally deficit by the U.S. Department of Transportation, had repairs on it postponed for a year.
One trillion dollars squandered in the debacle in Iraq. A clamp on vital investments here at home. Those are the stated priorities of modern-day conservatives — a far remove from those of President Dwight Eisenhower, who built the interstate highway system while putting a lid on military spending and balancing the budget. Ike knew that infrastructure was important; military adventurism was dangerous and fiscal balance was common sense. Modern-day conservatives have abandoned every part of his lessons. ...
The pharmaceutical industry is adamant that these gifts have no influence on which drugs physicians prescribe to their patients.
Thursday, August 9, 2007 by The American Prospect | Tracking Pharma Gifts to Doctors | by Megan Tady
A slow wheel is beginning to turn in Congress in favor of forcing Big Pharma to disclose the amount of change it’s dropping into doctors’ pockets.
While it’s no secret that pharmaceutical companies lavish gifts on doctors — everything from free notepads and pens to meals to the more extravagant paid trips or seminars — most patients are in the dark about who, exactly, is courting their physicians. But Congress may be finally acknowledging this relationship, one important step toward creating a national gift registry so patients can track the perks Big Pharma is giving to their doctors. In June, the nonprofit government watchdog Public Citizen testified before the Senate Special Committee on Aging in favor of federal legislation that would require drug companies to disclose payments to doctors. But the group urged lawmakers, before jumping on the proposal, to examine a Petri dish of existing disclosure laws. Although four states and the District of Columbia already have disclosure laws on the books, the group says they are “inadequate” and do not give patients a clear picture of how money is changing hands.
The pharmaceutical industry spent an estimated $25.3 billion peddling prescription drugs in 2003, and much of that money went to physicians in the form of free samples, meals, conference fees, air fares, and continuing medical education activities. The only reins on Big Pharma’s giveaway are voluntary regulations set by the American Medical Association (AMA) and adopted by the trade association Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. The AMA’s ethical guidelines, which are supposed to “prevent inappropriate gift-giving practices,” only sanction gifts valued at $100 or less.
The pharmaceutical industry is adamant that these gifts have no influence on which drugs physicians prescribe to their patients. But a growing body of evidence shows that drug companies’ generosity may in fact be guiding the pen across the prescription pad.
“The drug industry doesn’t spend $20 or $30 billion a year on advertising prescription drugs unless they believe it has an impact on doctors prescribing,” said Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group. “You would probably like to know whether your doctor is getting no money, some money, a lot of money, or a huge amount of money, because it’s going to influence what that doctor decides for you.” ...
A slow wheel is beginning to turn in Congress in favor of forcing Big Pharma to disclose the amount of change it’s dropping into doctors’ pockets.
While it’s no secret that pharmaceutical companies lavish gifts on doctors — everything from free notepads and pens to meals to the more extravagant paid trips or seminars — most patients are in the dark about who, exactly, is courting their physicians. But Congress may be finally acknowledging this relationship, one important step toward creating a national gift registry so patients can track the perks Big Pharma is giving to their doctors. In June, the nonprofit government watchdog Public Citizen testified before the Senate Special Committee on Aging in favor of federal legislation that would require drug companies to disclose payments to doctors. But the group urged lawmakers, before jumping on the proposal, to examine a Petri dish of existing disclosure laws. Although four states and the District of Columbia already have disclosure laws on the books, the group says they are “inadequate” and do not give patients a clear picture of how money is changing hands.
The pharmaceutical industry spent an estimated $25.3 billion peddling prescription drugs in 2003, and much of that money went to physicians in the form of free samples, meals, conference fees, air fares, and continuing medical education activities. The only reins on Big Pharma’s giveaway are voluntary regulations set by the American Medical Association (AMA) and adopted by the trade association Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. The AMA’s ethical guidelines, which are supposed to “prevent inappropriate gift-giving practices,” only sanction gifts valued at $100 or less.
The pharmaceutical industry is adamant that these gifts have no influence on which drugs physicians prescribe to their patients. But a growing body of evidence shows that drug companies’ generosity may in fact be guiding the pen across the prescription pad.
“The drug industry doesn’t spend $20 or $30 billion a year on advertising prescription drugs unless they believe it has an impact on doctors prescribing,” said Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group. “You would probably like to know whether your doctor is getting no money, some money, a lot of money, or a huge amount of money, because it’s going to influence what that doctor decides for you.” ...
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
"I'm afraid the promise the president made ...to rebuild and restore New Orleans) ... comes across as hollow today."
Levees, coastal projects at risk | Bush threatens to veto costly bill | Thursday, August 02, 2007 | By Bill Walsh
WASHINGTON -- In a sharp and unexpected blow to Louisiana, President Bush threatened Wednesday to veto long-awaited legislation that would enhance hurricane protection along a Gulf Coast still struggling to recover from the devastating storms of two years ago.
House and Senate negotiators struck a bargain late last week on a $21 billion reauthorization of the Water Resources Development Act, with about 20 percent going to projects in Louisiana. The measure has broad support and is expected to get final passage this week before lawmakers leave for the month long August recess, and is expected to pass by veto-proof margins.
In a strong bipartisan vote, the House passed the bill 381-40.
...
Bush had made no secret of his concerns over the water bill, issuing two statements this spring raising objections to the spending levels. However, his veto threat took even those in his own party by surprise, particularly given his promises to improve hurricane protection around New Orleans.
"Considering the well-publicized criticism of the way the administration handled this (Hurricane Katrina) disaster, I'm stunned," said Sen. David Vitter, R-La., who vowed to "work enthusiastically" to override a veto. "I'm afraid the promise the president made to the nation in Jackson Square (to rebuild and restore New Orleans and the coast) comes across as hollow today." ...
WASHINGTON -- In a sharp and unexpected blow to Louisiana, President Bush threatened Wednesday to veto long-awaited legislation that would enhance hurricane protection along a Gulf Coast still struggling to recover from the devastating storms of two years ago.
House and Senate negotiators struck a bargain late last week on a $21 billion reauthorization of the Water Resources Development Act, with about 20 percent going to projects in Louisiana. The measure has broad support and is expected to get final passage this week before lawmakers leave for the month long August recess, and is expected to pass by veto-proof margins.
In a strong bipartisan vote, the House passed the bill 381-40.
...
Bush had made no secret of his concerns over the water bill, issuing two statements this spring raising objections to the spending levels. However, his veto threat took even those in his own party by surprise, particularly given his promises to improve hurricane protection around New Orleans.
"Considering the well-publicized criticism of the way the administration handled this (Hurricane Katrina) disaster, I'm stunned," said Sen. David Vitter, R-La., who vowed to "work enthusiastically" to override a veto. "I'm afraid the promise the president made to the nation in Jackson Square (to rebuild and restore New Orleans and the coast) comes across as hollow today." ...
Bush Nominee Blocked After He Pushes $30B Tax Break for Wal-Mart
Friday, August 3, 2007 | Bush Nominee Blocked After He Pushes $30B Tax Break for Wal-Mart
Last week, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) grilled White House budget director nominee Jim Nussle at Nussle's Senate confirmation hearing. The interchange, which you can watch here, was absolutely extraordinary. Sanders forced Nussle to go on record admitting that at a time the White House is trying to prevent better-funding children's health care programs, he supports giving the members of Wal-Mart's Walton family alone a tax break worth more than $30 billion. ...
Last week, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) grilled White House budget director nominee Jim Nussle at Nussle's Senate confirmation hearing. The interchange, which you can watch here, was absolutely extraordinary. Sanders forced Nussle to go on record admitting that at a time the White House is trying to prevent better-funding children's health care programs, he supports giving the members of Wal-Mart's Walton family alone a tax break worth more than $30 billion. ...
Tougher Rules Change Game for Lobbyists ... requiring them to certify the good behavior of their employees
Tougher Rules Change Game for Lobbyists | By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK | Published: August 7, 2007
WASHINGTON, Aug. 6 — H. Stewart Van Scoyoc, founder of one of the biggest lobbying firms in Washington, spent an anxious morning with his lawyer last week assessing the far-reaching ethics and lobbying rules Congress had passed the day before.
The first worry was what lobbyists are calling the new “temptation rules.” Not only do they bar lawmakers and aides from accepting any gifts, meals or trips from lobbyists, they also impose penalties up to $200,000 and five years in prison on any lobbyist who provides such freebies.
...
By requiring them to certify the good behavior of their employees, the law puts lobbyists at new legal risk and could subject them to new pressure from prosecutors. And new centralized disclosures of lobbyists’ campaign contributions, fund-raising activities and even their achievements — in the form of Congressional earmarksin spending bills — make it only easier for federal investigators to paint unflattering portraits of lobbyists’ influence.
...
WASHINGTON, Aug. 6 — H. Stewart Van Scoyoc, founder of one of the biggest lobbying firms in Washington, spent an anxious morning with his lawyer last week assessing the far-reaching ethics and lobbying rules Congress had passed the day before.
The first worry was what lobbyists are calling the new “temptation rules.” Not only do they bar lawmakers and aides from accepting any gifts, meals or trips from lobbyists, they also impose penalties up to $200,000 and five years in prison on any lobbyist who provides such freebies.
...
By requiring them to certify the good behavior of their employees, the law puts lobbyists at new legal risk and could subject them to new pressure from prosecutors. And new centralized disclosures of lobbyists’ campaign contributions, fund-raising activities and even their achievements — in the form of Congressional earmarksin spending bills — make it only easier for federal investigators to paint unflattering portraits of lobbyists’ influence.
...
terrific legislation will give the public important new information about the cozy relationships between industry lobbyists and members of Congress ..
Congress Delivers on Lobbying and Ethics Reform!
Finally – real ethics reform passed in Congress! Yesterday the Senate approved S. 1 – the “Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007” – with a veto-proof majority of 83 to 14. On Tuesday, the House also passed the bill with flying colors by 411 to 8.
This terrific legislation will give the public important new information about the cozy relationships between industry lobbyists and members of Congress, and limit the outrageous gifts and travel junkets that laid the groundwork for the culture of corruption on Capitol Hill.
Today marks the final chapter of a long struggle. We first kicked off the drive to fix Capitol Hill over three years ago. Back then, our “wish list” of reforms was largely ignored by members of Congress and the media – even laughed at as a political impossibility. Then Jack Abramoff’s world – and that of many prominent members of Congress – started to unravel.
...
Here are some of the hard-won reforms that we all won together:
* Requires more of the money trail on the Internet: Lobbyist fundraising for lawmakers, including direct campaign contributions, bundled contributions and the hosting of fundraising events will be posted on the Internet.
* Slows the revolving door between Congress and K Street: The bill extends the cooling off period for senators from one year to two, and requires all members to publicly disclose any job negotiations while serving in Congress.
* Lobbying revealed online: Lobbyists must report their lobbying activities every three months in an electronic format, to be immediately posted on the Internet.
* No more goody bags: The bill bans all gifts from lobbyists to lawmakers and their staff.
* No more golf trips to Scotland: The bill ends the congressional travel junkets by: 1) Prohibiting any organization that employs a lobbyist from sponsoring trips for members longer than one-day; 2) requiring pre-approval and disclosure of all trips on the Internet; 3) restricting the use of private corporate jets to fly members around the globe; and 4) prohibiting lobbyists from going along on any of these trips.
* Earmarks in the sunlight: The bill requires disclosure of the sponsor and recipient of earmarks to be posted on the Internet 48 hours before final approval of appropriations to tax bills, and allows any senator to remove an earmark “air-dropped” into a conference report by a point of order challenge.
* The party’s over: The bill prohibits on members of Congress attending lavish parties sponsored by lobbyists at the national party conventions.
We should all be pleased – this long, hard fight produced real change. We commend the leadership in Congress on this bold step to curb corruption – Speaker Pelosi, Representative Van Hollen, and Senator Feingold in particular took the concerns of Americans to heart and in hand.
But most of the thanks is due to the many people for their thousands of e-mails, calls and meetings with members of Congress. We would not be celebrating this victory for reform without the people-powered politics behind the call for change.
Finally – real ethics reform passed in Congress! Yesterday the Senate approved S. 1 – the “Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007” – with a veto-proof majority of 83 to 14. On Tuesday, the House also passed the bill with flying colors by 411 to 8.
This terrific legislation will give the public important new information about the cozy relationships between industry lobbyists and members of Congress, and limit the outrageous gifts and travel junkets that laid the groundwork for the culture of corruption on Capitol Hill.
Today marks the final chapter of a long struggle. We first kicked off the drive to fix Capitol Hill over three years ago. Back then, our “wish list” of reforms was largely ignored by members of Congress and the media – even laughed at as a political impossibility. Then Jack Abramoff’s world – and that of many prominent members of Congress – started to unravel.
...
Here are some of the hard-won reforms that we all won together:
* Requires more of the money trail on the Internet: Lobbyist fundraising for lawmakers, including direct campaign contributions, bundled contributions and the hosting of fundraising events will be posted on the Internet.
* Slows the revolving door between Congress and K Street: The bill extends the cooling off period for senators from one year to two, and requires all members to publicly disclose any job negotiations while serving in Congress.
* Lobbying revealed online: Lobbyists must report their lobbying activities every three months in an electronic format, to be immediately posted on the Internet.
* No more goody bags: The bill bans all gifts from lobbyists to lawmakers and their staff.
* No more golf trips to Scotland: The bill ends the congressional travel junkets by: 1) Prohibiting any organization that employs a lobbyist from sponsoring trips for members longer than one-day; 2) requiring pre-approval and disclosure of all trips on the Internet; 3) restricting the use of private corporate jets to fly members around the globe; and 4) prohibiting lobbyists from going along on any of these trips.
* Earmarks in the sunlight: The bill requires disclosure of the sponsor and recipient of earmarks to be posted on the Internet 48 hours before final approval of appropriations to tax bills, and allows any senator to remove an earmark “air-dropped” into a conference report by a point of order challenge.
* The party’s over: The bill prohibits on members of Congress attending lavish parties sponsored by lobbyists at the national party conventions.
We should all be pleased – this long, hard fight produced real change. We commend the leadership in Congress on this bold step to curb corruption – Speaker Pelosi, Representative Van Hollen, and Senator Feingold in particular took the concerns of Americans to heart and in hand.
But most of the thanks is due to the many people for their thousands of e-mails, calls and meetings with members of Congress. We would not be celebrating this victory for reform without the people-powered politics behind the call for change.
Friday, August 03, 2007
BP: the first company in years allowed to increase the amount of toxic chemicals pumped into the Great Lakes
EPA backs BP dumping | Lake will get more pollution
Rebuffing bipartisan pressure from members of Congress, the Bush administration's top environmental regulator on Tuesday declined to stop the BP refinery in northwest Indiana from dumping more pollution into Lake Michigan.
Stephen Johnson, administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said he saw nothing wrong with the permit Indiana regulators awarded in June to BP, the first company in years allowed to increase the amount of toxic chemicals pumped into the Great Lakes.
As part of a $3 billion expansion of its Whiting, Ind., refinery, the nation's fourth largest, BP won permission to release more ammonia and suspended solids into the lake. Indiana regulators also gave BP until 2012 to meet a stringent federal standard for mercury pollution set by the EPA in 1995.
...
Lawmakers and other critics question why the EPA is allowing BP to increase the amount of pollution it puts into the lake even as the agency addresses years of past contamination.
"Years of accelerated pollution from BP will create another problem in the future," said U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) "We need to prevent that."
Rebuffing bipartisan pressure from members of Congress, the Bush administration's top environmental regulator on Tuesday declined to stop the BP refinery in northwest Indiana from dumping more pollution into Lake Michigan.
Stephen Johnson, administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, said he saw nothing wrong with the permit Indiana regulators awarded in June to BP, the first company in years allowed to increase the amount of toxic chemicals pumped into the Great Lakes.
As part of a $3 billion expansion of its Whiting, Ind., refinery, the nation's fourth largest, BP won permission to release more ammonia and suspended solids into the lake. Indiana regulators also gave BP until 2012 to meet a stringent federal standard for mercury pollution set by the EPA in 1995.
...
Lawmakers and other critics question why the EPA is allowing BP to increase the amount of pollution it puts into the lake even as the agency addresses years of past contamination.
"Years of accelerated pollution from BP will create another problem in the future," said U.S. Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) "We need to prevent that."
hallmark of fascism is a merging of state, corporate power coupled with the transfer of power from the individual to the government, corporate elite
An Examination of Bush Fascism Tj Templeton, founder/director Project for the Old American Century
........... There is no Little red book or manifesto of fascism; it cannot be gathered from one systematic treatise but must be culled from various sources that express thought and opinion as much as political philosophy. For this reason, the Project for the Old American Century has compiled a table comparing the research done by three critics of fascism. Each writer has detailed 14 defining characteristics of fascism pulled from the examination of the regimes of Mussolini, Pinochet, Franco, Hitler, Suharto, and others. The order has been slightly rearranged to better reflect the similarities and discrepancies:
1. Powerful and continuing expressions of nationalism: Catchy slogans, pride in the military, and demands for unity were common themes in expressing this nationalism. It was usually coupled with a suspicion of things foreign that often bordered on xenophobia. 1. To people who feel deprived of a clear social identity, Ur-Fascism says that their only privilege is the most common one, to be born in the same country: This is the origin of nationalism. 1. There may or may not be a single charismatic leader in charge of the government, i.e., a "dictator". 2. Government establishes and enforces the rules of "right" thinking, "right" action, and "right" religious devotion.2. Disdain for the importance of human rights: Through clever use of propaganda, the population was brought to accept these human rights abuses by marginalizing, even demonizing, those being targeted. When abuse was egregious, the tactic was to use secrecy, denial, and disinformation.
...
3. The followers must feel humiliated by their enemies: by shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.
5.The fascist takeover of the government of a major power always leads to foreign war, sooner or later.
4. Ur-Fascism derives from individual or social frustration: one of the most typical features of the historical fascism was the appeal to a frustrated middle class
...
6. A controlled mass media: Methods included the control of licensing and access to resources, economic pressure, appeals to patriotism, and implied threats. The leaders of the mass media were often politically compatible with the power elite
7. Obsession with national security: It was usually an instrument of oppression, operating in secret and beyond any constraints. Its actions were justified under the rubric of protecting “national security,” and questioning its activities was portrayed as unpatriotic or even treasonous.
8. Religion and ruling elite tied together: . Propaganda kept up the illusion that the ruling elites were defenders of the faith and opponents of the “godless.” A perception was manufactured that opposing the power elite was tantamount to an attack on religion.
...
9. Power of corporations protected: Members of the economic elite were often pampered by the political elite to ensure a continued mutuality of interests, especially in the repression of “have-not” citizens.
9. There are few or no employee rights or protections, including the right of workers to bargain collectively. Only government approved labor unions or associations are permitted to exist, and that approval may be removed at any time, without prior notice.
................
The hallmark of fascism is a merging of state and corporate power coupled with the transfer of power from the individual to the government and corporate elite. It is for this reason that liberals as a whole must be purged or at the very least, marginalized. .........
The petrol is the property of the people of Iraq, and we shall sever the hands which cedes it to the US!
Baath statement The petrol is the property of the people of Iraq, and we shall sever the hands which cedes it to the US!
The petrol is the property of the people of Iraq,and we shall sever the hands which cedes it to the US! Great Iraqi people masses!Despite that our Party has times and again clarified its stand concerning the petrol question, what is going on en rapport to this requires to reconfirm our stand:1- Controlling the oil of Iraq was one of the most important objectives to invade Iraq not only in order to loot more and in a gangster way the peoples' riches by the US brigands and bandits but also to use the petrol as a tool to blackmail the whole world, to enslave the big powers and establish the global US dictatorship.
2- Safeguarding the petrol nationalization is one of the most important objectives of the Iraqi Resistance, while leading the Armed Iraqi revolution against the Occupation! Therefore, to keep the petrol as an Iraqi possession, an Iraqi industry, an Iraqi decision, an Iraqi distribution and an Iraqi utility and services are one of the most important objectives of the Baath Combat and the Armed Resistance. We shall deal without any hesitation with any step which might threaten this patriotic, and fundamental Iraqi reality, and we shall stand firm and resolved against anybody who tries to get around the nationalization and we shall use every possible mean against him.. The most important patriotic criteria now, is to hold to the nationalization and to reject the return of the foreign multinationals to control our most important material and strategic riches. ...
The petrol is the property of the people of Iraq,and we shall sever the hands which cedes it to the US! Great Iraqi people masses!Despite that our Party has times and again clarified its stand concerning the petrol question, what is going on en rapport to this requires to reconfirm our stand:1- Controlling the oil of Iraq was one of the most important objectives to invade Iraq not only in order to loot more and in a gangster way the peoples' riches by the US brigands and bandits but also to use the petrol as a tool to blackmail the whole world, to enslave the big powers and establish the global US dictatorship.
2- Safeguarding the petrol nationalization is one of the most important objectives of the Iraqi Resistance, while leading the Armed Iraqi revolution against the Occupation! Therefore, to keep the petrol as an Iraqi possession, an Iraqi industry, an Iraqi decision, an Iraqi distribution and an Iraqi utility and services are one of the most important objectives of the Baath Combat and the Armed Resistance. We shall deal without any hesitation with any step which might threaten this patriotic, and fundamental Iraqi reality, and we shall stand firm and resolved against anybody who tries to get around the nationalization and we shall use every possible mean against him.. The most important patriotic criteria now, is to hold to the nationalization and to reject the return of the foreign multinationals to control our most important material and strategic riches. ...
here’s a short list the mind-boggling transformations that have become standard operating procedure in the good old USA
Coming of Age in Bush’s America! By Reggie, Contributing Editor, TvNewsLIES.org
...
Really think about these last seven years and recoil at what it actually means to have come of age in Bush’s America,
To assist your reality check, here’s a short list the mind-boggling transformations that have become standard operating procedure in the good old USA. Read them carefully:*
* The outcome of an a presidential election can be decided by a handful of Supreme Court Justices rather than the people.
* A President of the United States need not speak honestly, coherently or intelligibly when not reading from a prepared text. It is acceptable for the President to be reviled around the globe and to be unable to travel anywhere without extraordinary protection from huge protests against his visit and his policies.
* Where it was once highly respected, the United States of America is now the most feared nation on Earth. The US can murder more civilians than all the world’s terrorists combined and claim its actions are meant to liberate people.
* The major tools of executive governance are lies, secrecy and the abuse of executive privilege. These methods are implemented under the guise of national security in order to thwart any and all departmental oversight.
* Voting machines can be privately owned by members of one political party, and need not have paper trails for verifying results. It is irrelevant to the election process that voting machines have been shown to be easily hacked, and that voting irregularities have prevented many thousands of people from voting or having their votes counted.
* Elected leaders and their cohorts can lie with impunity to the American people, to the Congress, to the UN and to the world. There is no oversight; there are no checks and balances, and no mainstream media to act as watchdogs for the people.
* The President can quietly override the will of the people by the use of signing statements. He can claim the authority to disobey hundreds of laws enacted by Congress, thereby asserting the power to set aside any statute when it conflicts with his personal interpretation of the Constitution.
...
* Soldiers can be sent into an immoral and unjust war with little planning and inadequate armor, and unending redeployment. At the same time, veterans’ health care is unimportant and can be shamefully administered.
* Terror threats can be fabricated at will to keep the public in a state of constant fear. Creating an illusory ‘war on terror’ can be used to gain public support for a costly and failing war that reaps huge profits for private contractors.
* Americans and others living in the US can be spied upon without probable cause and without the acquisition of warrants in defiance of existing FISA laws.
* Anyone can be declared an enemy combatant at the whim of the administration and can be confined indefinitely without being charged or having access to counsel.
* Torturing detainees in violation of the Geneva Convention is acceptable, and if in doubt, rendition to countries that will do the torturing is a viable alternative.
* There need be no accountability for anyone in or connected to the White House for inept performance, for disastrous decisions, or for criminal acts such as lying under oath, obstructing justice or revealing the identity of a covert CIA operative.
...
* Empirical science can be invalidated by biblical precepts.. Global warming and evolution are junk science.
…and on and on and on and on.
Do you really need more examples to ponder? I think not.
The distinction is clear: coming of age in Bush’s America means living with a new set of principles and practices that are diametrically opposed to those upon which this nation was founded.
...
Really think about these last seven years and recoil at what it actually means to have come of age in Bush’s America,
To assist your reality check, here’s a short list the mind-boggling transformations that have become standard operating procedure in the good old USA. Read them carefully:*
* The outcome of an a presidential election can be decided by a handful of Supreme Court Justices rather than the people.
* A President of the United States need not speak honestly, coherently or intelligibly when not reading from a prepared text. It is acceptable for the President to be reviled around the globe and to be unable to travel anywhere without extraordinary protection from huge protests against his visit and his policies.
* Where it was once highly respected, the United States of America is now the most feared nation on Earth. The US can murder more civilians than all the world’s terrorists combined and claim its actions are meant to liberate people.
* The major tools of executive governance are lies, secrecy and the abuse of executive privilege. These methods are implemented under the guise of national security in order to thwart any and all departmental oversight.
* Voting machines can be privately owned by members of one political party, and need not have paper trails for verifying results. It is irrelevant to the election process that voting machines have been shown to be easily hacked, and that voting irregularities have prevented many thousands of people from voting or having their votes counted.
* Elected leaders and their cohorts can lie with impunity to the American people, to the Congress, to the UN and to the world. There is no oversight; there are no checks and balances, and no mainstream media to act as watchdogs for the people.
* The President can quietly override the will of the people by the use of signing statements. He can claim the authority to disobey hundreds of laws enacted by Congress, thereby asserting the power to set aside any statute when it conflicts with his personal interpretation of the Constitution.
...
* Soldiers can be sent into an immoral and unjust war with little planning and inadequate armor, and unending redeployment. At the same time, veterans’ health care is unimportant and can be shamefully administered.
* Terror threats can be fabricated at will to keep the public in a state of constant fear. Creating an illusory ‘war on terror’ can be used to gain public support for a costly and failing war that reaps huge profits for private contractors.
* Americans and others living in the US can be spied upon without probable cause and without the acquisition of warrants in defiance of existing FISA laws.
* Anyone can be declared an enemy combatant at the whim of the administration and can be confined indefinitely without being charged or having access to counsel.
* Torturing detainees in violation of the Geneva Convention is acceptable, and if in doubt, rendition to countries that will do the torturing is a viable alternative.
* There need be no accountability for anyone in or connected to the White House for inept performance, for disastrous decisions, or for criminal acts such as lying under oath, obstructing justice or revealing the identity of a covert CIA operative.
...
* Empirical science can be invalidated by biblical precepts.. Global warming and evolution are junk science.
…and on and on and on and on.
Do you really need more examples to ponder? I think not.
The distinction is clear: coming of age in Bush’s America means living with a new set of principles and practices that are diametrically opposed to those upon which this nation was founded.
An independent oversight board created to identify intelligence abuses ... was vacant for the first two years of the Bush administration
In Intelligence World, A Mute WatchdogPanel Reported No Violations for Five Years By John Solomon Washington Post Staff Writer Sunday, July 15, 2007; A03
An independent oversight board created to identify intelligence abuses after the CIA scandals of the 1970s did not send any reports to the attorney general of legal violations during the first 5 1/2 years of the Bush administration's counterterrorism effort, the Justice Department has told Congress.
Although the FBI told the board of a few hundred legal or rules violations by its agents after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the board did not identify which of them were indeed legal violations. This spring, it forwarded reports of violations in 2006, officials said.
The President's Intelligence Oversight Board -- the principal civilian watchdog of the intelligence community -- is obligated under a 26-year-old executive order to tell the attorney general and the president about any intelligence activities it believes "may be unlawful." The board was vacant for the first two years of the Bush administration.
...
Gonzales wrote that he did not consider the conduct in those reports to be abuses because the violations involved mistakes, not deliberate misconduct. "My testimony was completely truthful, and I stand by that testimony," he wrote.
Leahy scoffed at Gonzales's explanation. "The American people deserve an attorney general who will fully and accurately inform the Senate and the public about violations of civil liberties. Instead, they have one who misleads Congress and then hides behind dictionary definitions," he said.
An independent oversight board created to identify intelligence abuses after the CIA scandals of the 1970s did not send any reports to the attorney general of legal violations during the first 5 1/2 years of the Bush administration's counterterrorism effort, the Justice Department has told Congress.
Although the FBI told the board of a few hundred legal or rules violations by its agents after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, the board did not identify which of them were indeed legal violations. This spring, it forwarded reports of violations in 2006, officials said.
The President's Intelligence Oversight Board -- the principal civilian watchdog of the intelligence community -- is obligated under a 26-year-old executive order to tell the attorney general and the president about any intelligence activities it believes "may be unlawful." The board was vacant for the first two years of the Bush administration.
...
Gonzales wrote that he did not consider the conduct in those reports to be abuses because the violations involved mistakes, not deliberate misconduct. "My testimony was completely truthful, and I stand by that testimony," he wrote.
Leahy scoffed at Gonzales's explanation. "The American people deserve an attorney general who will fully and accurately inform the Senate and the public about violations of civil liberties. Instead, they have one who misleads Congress and then hides behind dictionary definitions," he said.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Pentagon and the Bush administration criticized for lying about Tillman death: New details ... [possible murder]
AP: New Details on Tillman's Death | Jul 27, 1:48 AM (ET) | By MARTHA MENDOZA
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman's forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player's death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.
"The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described," a doctor who examined Tillman's body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators.
The doctors - whose names were blacked out - said that the bullet holes were so close together that it appeared the Army Ranger was cut down by an M-16 fired from a mere 10 yards or so away.
Ultimately, the Pentagon did conduct a criminal investigation, and asked Tillman's comrades whether he was disliked by his men and whether they had any reason to believe he was deliberately killed. The Pentagon eventually ruled that Tillman's death at the hands of his comrades was a friendly-fire accident.
...
- In his last words moments before he was killed, Tillman snapped at a panicky comrade under fire to shut up and stop "sniveling."
- Army attorneys sent each other congratulatory e-mails for keeping criminal investigators at bay as the Army conducted an internal friendly-fire investigation that resulted in administrative, or non-criminal, punishments.
- The three-star general who kept the truth about Tillman's death from his family and the public told investigators some 70 times that he had a bad memory and couldn't recall details of his actions.
- No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene - no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck.
The Pentagon and the Bush administration have been criticized in recent months for lying about the circumstances of Tillman's death. ...
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - Army medical examiners were suspicious about the close proximity of the three bullet holes in Pat Tillman's forehead and tried without success to get authorities to investigate whether the former NFL player's death amounted to a crime, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.
"The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described," a doctor who examined Tillman's body after he was killed on the battlefield in Afghanistan in 2004 told investigators.
The doctors - whose names were blacked out - said that the bullet holes were so close together that it appeared the Army Ranger was cut down by an M-16 fired from a mere 10 yards or so away.
Ultimately, the Pentagon did conduct a criminal investigation, and asked Tillman's comrades whether he was disliked by his men and whether they had any reason to believe he was deliberately killed. The Pentagon eventually ruled that Tillman's death at the hands of his comrades was a friendly-fire accident.
...
- In his last words moments before he was killed, Tillman snapped at a panicky comrade under fire to shut up and stop "sniveling."
- Army attorneys sent each other congratulatory e-mails for keeping criminal investigators at bay as the Army conducted an internal friendly-fire investigation that resulted in administrative, or non-criminal, punishments.
- The three-star general who kept the truth about Tillman's death from his family and the public told investigators some 70 times that he had a bad memory and couldn't recall details of his actions.
- No evidence at all of enemy fire was found at the scene - no one was hit by enemy fire, nor was any government equipment struck.
The Pentagon and the Bush administration have been criticized in recent months for lying about the circumstances of Tillman's death. ...
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
[Outsourced support civilians in Iraq] "Why am I under workers' comp if workers' comp does not recognize a combat injury?"
Service Civilians and the Wounds of War | Many Fill Vital Roles in Iraq, but Medical Care Can Be Spotty | By Ann Scott Tyson | Washington Post Staff Writer | Wednesday, July 25, 2007; Page A01
...
Nevertheless, his status as an Army civilian would leave him stranded in the aftermath of the June 16, 2004, attack, when the bomb hit his Humvee so hard it blew his M-60 off its turret.
In the months that followed, Helms recalled, he was denied vital care for his wounds -- ranging from shrapnel in his left arm to traumatic brain injury. Forced to rely on federal workers' compensation and turned away from regular care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and other military hospitals, Helms has faced years of frustration grappling with bureaucracies unprepared to help a government civilian wounded in combat.
"I did not have an 'accident' while working. I was subjected to an offensive attack by an enemy of the U.S. government who attempted to kill me," said Helms, now a counterintelligence agent at the 902nd's Fort Knox, Ky., field office. "Why am I under workers' comp if workers' comp does not recognize a combat injury?" ...
...
Nevertheless, his status as an Army civilian would leave him stranded in the aftermath of the June 16, 2004, attack, when the bomb hit his Humvee so hard it blew his M-60 off its turret.
In the months that followed, Helms recalled, he was denied vital care for his wounds -- ranging from shrapnel in his left arm to traumatic brain injury. Forced to rely on federal workers' compensation and turned away from regular care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and other military hospitals, Helms has faced years of frustration grappling with bureaucracies unprepared to help a government civilian wounded in combat.
"I did not have an 'accident' while working. I was subjected to an offensive attack by an enemy of the U.S. government who attempted to kill me," said Helms, now a counterintelligence agent at the 902nd's Fort Knox, Ky., field office. "Why am I under workers' comp if workers' comp does not recognize a combat injury?" ...
[Iraq / US Depleted Uranium shells] is facing about 140,000 cases of cancer, with 7,000 to 8,000 new ones registered each year
World | Iraqis blame U.S. depleted uranium for surge in cancer | 19:20 | 23/07/2007
CAIRO, July 23 (RIA Novosti) - Iraq's environment minister blamed Monday the use of depleted uranium weapons by U.S. forces during the 2003 Operation Shock and Awe for the current surge in cancer cases across the country.
As a result of "at least 350 sites in Iraq being contaminated during bombing" with depleted uranium (DU) weapons, Nermin Othman said, the nation is facing about 140,000 cases of cancer, with 7,000 to 8,000 new ones registered each year.
Speaking at a ministerial meeting of the Arab League, she also complained that many chemical plants and oil facilities had been destroyed during the two military campaigns since the 1990s, but the ecological consequences remain unclear.
...
CAIRO, July 23 (RIA Novosti) - Iraq's environment minister blamed Monday the use of depleted uranium weapons by U.S. forces during the 2003 Operation Shock and Awe for the current surge in cancer cases across the country.
As a result of "at least 350 sites in Iraq being contaminated during bombing" with depleted uranium (DU) weapons, Nermin Othman said, the nation is facing about 140,000 cases of cancer, with 7,000 to 8,000 new ones registered each year.
Speaking at a ministerial meeting of the Arab League, she also complained that many chemical plants and oil facilities had been destroyed during the two military campaigns since the 1990s, but the ecological consequences remain unclear.
...
Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham described a level of corruption on his part more extensive than previously known ... use of legislative “earmarks,”
Imprisoned Cunningham outlines depths of corruption to FBI | By George E. Condon Jr. and Marcus Stern | COPLEY NEWS SERVICE | 8:53 p.m. July 17, 2007
WASHINGTON – In two days of prison interviews with federal agents this year, disgraced former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham described a level of corruption on his part more extensive than previously known and dealt a potentially devastating blow to the defense being waged by one of the defense contractors alleged to have bribed him.
...
Cunningham was able to promote defense contracts for favored companies through the use of legislative “earmarks,” provisions lawmakers could slip anonymously into spending bills without debate, discussion or disclosure that benefit interests in their districts or their political supporters Wilkes has said a $100,000 payment he made to Cunningham in 2000, was not a bribe, but instead was to purchase Cunningham's river yacht, the Kelly C.
...
According to the FBI summary, Cunningham admits to being provided with prostitutes, misleading congressional ethics officials, making others buy gifts for his daughters, personally devising the schemes to launder his bribes, lying to his staff, and putting unrelenting pressure on government officials who thought the defense contracts he pushed with congressional earmarks were wasteful. ...
WASHINGTON – In two days of prison interviews with federal agents this year, disgraced former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham described a level of corruption on his part more extensive than previously known and dealt a potentially devastating blow to the defense being waged by one of the defense contractors alleged to have bribed him.
...
Cunningham was able to promote defense contracts for favored companies through the use of legislative “earmarks,” provisions lawmakers could slip anonymously into spending bills without debate, discussion or disclosure that benefit interests in their districts or their political supporters Wilkes has said a $100,000 payment he made to Cunningham in 2000, was not a bribe, but instead was to purchase Cunningham's river yacht, the Kelly C.
...
According to the FBI summary, Cunningham admits to being provided with prostitutes, misleading congressional ethics officials, making others buy gifts for his daughters, personally devising the schemes to launder his bribes, lying to his staff, and putting unrelenting pressure on government officials who thought the defense contracts he pushed with congressional earmarks were wasteful. ...
ordered Friday to pay a $634.5 million fine for misleading the public about the painkiller's risk of addiction
OxyContin Maker, 3 Execs Fined $634.5M | Friday July 20, 8:23 pm ET | By Sue Lindsey, Associated Press Writer
Purdue Pharma, 3 Executives Ordered to Pay $634.5M Fine for Misleading Public About OxyContin
ABINGDON, Va. (AP) -- Purdue Pharma L.P., the maker of OxyContin, and three of its executives were ordered Friday to pay a $634.5 million fine for misleading the public about the painkiller's risk of addiction. ...
Purdue Pharma, 3 Executives Ordered to Pay $634.5M Fine for Misleading Public About OxyContin
ABINGDON, Va. (AP) -- Purdue Pharma L.P., the maker of OxyContin, and three of its executives were ordered Friday to pay a $634.5 million fine for misleading the public about the painkiller's risk of addiction. ...
Saturday, July 21, 2007
[House Intelligence Committee ] still-unreleased findings say intelligence committee aides were used by the California congressman, now in prison for
Cunningham report portrays entangled panel | By Greg Miller, Times Staff Writer | July 16, 2007
...
The still-unreleased findings say intelligence committee aides were used by the California congressman, now in prison for bribery.
...
The report, a declassified version of which was obtained by the Los Angeles Times, describes the committee as a dysfunctional entity that served as a crossroads for almost every major figure in the ongoing criminal probe by the Justice Department.
The document describes breakdowns in leadership and controls that it says allowed Cunningham — the former congressman (R-Rancho Santa Fe) who began an eight-year prison term last year for taking bribes and evading taxes — to use his House position to steer millions of dollars to corrupt contractors.
When the committee's investigation was completed last year, the Republican-controlled panel would not release the results; now that the committee is controlled by Democrats, it still will not release the findings.
The report provides the most detailed account to date of how former CIA Executive Director Kyle Dustin "Dusty" Foggo, whose indictment on charges of defrauding the government was recently expanded, allegedly used [House Intelligence Committee] committee connections to advance his career at the agency.
And the report sheds new light on the roles of senior committee aides, including retired CIA case officer Brant Bassett, who had ties to Cunningham and Foggo as well as to contractors accused of paying the congressman millions of dollars.
...
For all its finger-pointing at staffers, the document fails to address whether other committee members were aware of Cunningham's abuses or were culpable. For instance, the report avoids any scrutiny of former Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), who was chairman of the panel when Cunningham's most egregious abuses occurred. Goss went on to serve as CIA director, from September 2004 to May 2006.
Democrats complained bitterly a year ago when Republicans blocked release of a declassified version of the final report. But two weeks ago, several Democrats joined Republicans to block the report's release only to other members of Congress. Five Democrats objected to keeping the report secret.
Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas), who assumed leadership of the committee after Democrats won control of Congress last fall, said some Democratic members were reluctant to release a document that singled out staff members for criticism. ...
...
The still-unreleased findings say intelligence committee aides were used by the California congressman, now in prison for bribery.
...
The report, a declassified version of which was obtained by the Los Angeles Times, describes the committee as a dysfunctional entity that served as a crossroads for almost every major figure in the ongoing criminal probe by the Justice Department.
The document describes breakdowns in leadership and controls that it says allowed Cunningham — the former congressman (R-Rancho Santa Fe) who began an eight-year prison term last year for taking bribes and evading taxes — to use his House position to steer millions of dollars to corrupt contractors.
When the committee's investigation was completed last year, the Republican-controlled panel would not release the results; now that the committee is controlled by Democrats, it still will not release the findings.
The report provides the most detailed account to date of how former CIA Executive Director Kyle Dustin "Dusty" Foggo, whose indictment on charges of defrauding the government was recently expanded, allegedly used [House Intelligence Committee] committee connections to advance his career at the agency.
And the report sheds new light on the roles of senior committee aides, including retired CIA case officer Brant Bassett, who had ties to Cunningham and Foggo as well as to contractors accused of paying the congressman millions of dollars.
...
For all its finger-pointing at staffers, the document fails to address whether other committee members were aware of Cunningham's abuses or were culpable. For instance, the report avoids any scrutiny of former Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), who was chairman of the panel when Cunningham's most egregious abuses occurred. Goss went on to serve as CIA director, from September 2004 to May 2006.
Democrats complained bitterly a year ago when Republicans blocked release of a declassified version of the final report. But two weeks ago, several Democrats joined Republicans to block the report's release only to other members of Congress. Five Democrats objected to keeping the report secret.
Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-Texas), who assumed leadership of the committee after Democrats won control of Congress last fall, said some Democratic members were reluctant to release a document that singled out staff members for criticism. ...
"because they actually had to give up time with their families for the god awful places we sent them."
White House Had Drug Officials Appear With GOP Candidates | By Michael A. Fletcher | Washington Post Staff Writer | Wednesday, July 18, 2007; Page A08
White House officials arranged for top officials at the Office of National Drug Control Policy to help as many as 18 vulnerable Republican congressmen by making appearances and sometimes announcing new federal grants in the lawmakers' districts in the months leading up to the November 2006 elections, a Democratic lawmaker said yesterday.
...
"This recognition is not something we hear every day and we should feel confident that our hard work is noticed," said the e-mail, written by Douglas Simon, the drug policy office's White House liaison. "The director and the deputies deserve the most recognition because they actually had to give up time with their families for the god awful places we sent them."
The drug control office has had a history of being nonpartisan, and a 1994 law bars the agency's officials from engaging in political activities even on their own time. ...
White House officials arranged for top officials at the Office of National Drug Control Policy to help as many as 18 vulnerable Republican congressmen by making appearances and sometimes announcing new federal grants in the lawmakers' districts in the months leading up to the November 2006 elections, a Democratic lawmaker said yesterday.
...
"This recognition is not something we hear every day and we should feel confident that our hard work is noticed," said the e-mail, written by Douglas Simon, the drug policy office's White House liaison. "The director and the deputies deserve the most recognition because they actually had to give up time with their families for the god awful places we sent them."
The drug control office has had a history of being nonpartisan, and a 1994 law bars the agency's officials from engaging in political activities even on their own time. ...
top Bush administration officials repeatedly tried to weaken or suppress important public health reports because of political considerations
Former surgeon general cites political interference | By Gardiner Harris | Published: July 11, 2007
WASHINGTON: Dr. Richard Carmona, a former U.S. surgeon general, told a congressional panel that top Bush administration officials repeatedly tried to weaken or suppress important public health reports because of political considerations.
The administration, Carmona said Tuesday, would not allow him to speak or issue reports on the subjects of stem cells, emergency contraception, sex education or prison, mental or global health issues. Top officials tried to "water down" a landmark report on secondhand smoke and delayed it for years, he said. Released last year, the report concluded that even brief exposure to cigarette smoke can cause immediate harm.
Carmona said he was ordered to mention President George W. Bush three times on every page of his speeches. He also said he was asked to make speeches to support Republican political candidates and to attend political briefings.
Administration officials even discouraged him from attending the Special Olympics because, he said, of that charitable organization's longtime ties to a "prominent family" that he declined to name. "I was specifically told by a senior person, 'Why would you want to help those people?' " Carmona said.
The Special Olympics is one of the nation's premier charitable organizations to benefit disabled people, and the Kennedy family has long been deeply involved in it. When asked after the hearing whether that "prominent family" was the Kennedys, Carmona responded, "You said it. I didn't." ...
WASHINGTON: Dr. Richard Carmona, a former U.S. surgeon general, told a congressional panel that top Bush administration officials repeatedly tried to weaken or suppress important public health reports because of political considerations.
The administration, Carmona said Tuesday, would not allow him to speak or issue reports on the subjects of stem cells, emergency contraception, sex education or prison, mental or global health issues. Top officials tried to "water down" a landmark report on secondhand smoke and delayed it for years, he said. Released last year, the report concluded that even brief exposure to cigarette smoke can cause immediate harm.
Carmona said he was ordered to mention President George W. Bush three times on every page of his speeches. He also said he was asked to make speeches to support Republican political candidates and to attend political briefings.
Administration officials even discouraged him from attending the Special Olympics because, he said, of that charitable organization's longtime ties to a "prominent family" that he declined to name. "I was specifically told by a senior person, 'Why would you want to help those people?' " Carmona said.
The Special Olympics is one of the nation's premier charitable organizations to benefit disabled people, and the Kennedy family has long been deeply involved in it. When asked after the hearing whether that "prominent family" was the Kennedys, Carmona responded, "You said it. I didn't." ...
eview and probably overturn eight decisions on wildlife and land-use issues made by a senior political appointee ... favored industry
US Agency May Reverse Eight Decisions on Wildlife | By John M. Broder | The New York Times | Saturday 21 July 2007
Washington - The Interior Department said Friday that it would review and probably overturn eight decisions on wildlife and land-use issues made by a senior political appointee who has been found to have improperly favored industry and landowners over agency scientists.
...
"We wouldn't be doing them if we didn't suspect the decision would be different," Mr. Hall said in a telephone conference with journalists. "It's a blemish on the scientific integrity of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Interior."
Washington - The Interior Department said Friday that it would review and probably overturn eight decisions on wildlife and land-use issues made by a senior political appointee who has been found to have improperly favored industry and landowners over agency scientists.
...
"We wouldn't be doing them if we didn't suspect the decision would be different," Mr. Hall said in a telephone conference with journalists. "It's a blemish on the scientific integrity of the Fish and Wildlife Service and the Department of the Interior."
Monday, July 16, 2007
New Post-Katrina Investigations Reveal More Federal Waste And Incompetence
New Post-Katrina Investigations Reveal More Federal Waste And Incompetence
Three new investigations shed further light on how the Bush administration betrayed Gulf Coast residents during Hurricane Katrina, and how New Orleans and other affected areas are still suffering from federal waste and incompetence.
Some key highlights of the reports:
EPA allowed toxic chemicals to harm poor Katrina victims: A GAO report revealed that EPA publicly downplayed the risk of asbestos inhalation, which is often released during home demolition, to city residents and failed to deploy air monitors in predominantly African-American neighborhoods. ...
FEMA ignored its own hurricane plan: Prior to Katrina, FEMA created a “Southeast Louisiana Hurricane Backup Plan” which forecasted specific consequences and action-plans in the event of a hurricane. But “post-Katrina FEMA documents demonstrate that that the plan was never implemented.” ...
FEMA guaranteed billions in profits for big companies: Following Katrina, federal agencies “doled out more than $2.4 billion in cost-plus contracts,” which “offer companies no incentive to save money or keep costs from ballooning.” ...
Three new investigations shed further light on how the Bush administration betrayed Gulf Coast residents during Hurricane Katrina, and how New Orleans and other affected areas are still suffering from federal waste and incompetence.
Some key highlights of the reports:
EPA allowed toxic chemicals to harm poor Katrina victims: A GAO report revealed that EPA publicly downplayed the risk of asbestos inhalation, which is often released during home demolition, to city residents and failed to deploy air monitors in predominantly African-American neighborhoods. ...
FEMA ignored its own hurricane plan: Prior to Katrina, FEMA created a “Southeast Louisiana Hurricane Backup Plan” which forecasted specific consequences and action-plans in the event of a hurricane. But “post-Katrina FEMA documents demonstrate that that the plan was never implemented.” ...
FEMA guaranteed billions in profits for big companies: Following Katrina, federal agencies “doled out more than $2.4 billion in cost-plus contracts,” which “offer companies no incentive to save money or keep costs from ballooning.” ...
continuing corruption of Halliburton and its subsidiaries profiteering from contracts costing American taxpayers an unbelievable $22 billion
The Banality of Greed | Posted on Jun 26, 2007 | By Robert Scheer
As the Iraq war that Vice President Dick Cheney created continues to shred American—and many more Iraqi—lives, further documentation has emerged proving that, even during failed wars, the merchants of death profit. No company has profited more from the carnage in Iraq than Halliburton, which Cheney headed before choosing himself as Bush’s running mate. One shudders at the blissful arrogance of this modern Daddy Warbucks, who sees no conflict of interest over the blood-soaked profits garnered by the once-bankrupt division of the company that left him rich.
This week’s evidence of the continuing corruption of Halliburton and its subsidiaries profiteering from contracts costing American taxpayers an unbelievable $22 billion stems from a report by the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction. The report, only one of many about Halliburton’s recently severed subsidiary KBR, focuses on work done in Baghdad’s super-secure Green Zone. While parent company Halliburton insults U.S. taxpayers by relocating its headquarters to the tax shelter of Dubai, subsidiary KBR has been spun off to focus more directly on the American military contracts that form the core of its operations. ...
As the Iraq war that Vice President Dick Cheney created continues to shred American—and many more Iraqi—lives, further documentation has emerged proving that, even during failed wars, the merchants of death profit. No company has profited more from the carnage in Iraq than Halliburton, which Cheney headed before choosing himself as Bush’s running mate. One shudders at the blissful arrogance of this modern Daddy Warbucks, who sees no conflict of interest over the blood-soaked profits garnered by the once-bankrupt division of the company that left him rich.
This week’s evidence of the continuing corruption of Halliburton and its subsidiaries profiteering from contracts costing American taxpayers an unbelievable $22 billion stems from a report by the special inspector general for Iraq reconstruction. The report, only one of many about Halliburton’s recently severed subsidiary KBR, focuses on work done in Baghdad’s super-secure Green Zone. While parent company Halliburton insults U.S. taxpayers by relocating its headquarters to the tax shelter of Dubai, subsidiary KBR has been spun off to focus more directly on the American military contracts that form the core of its operations. ...
FEMA’s disaster planning was based on a set of predictions that proved to be remarkably accurate. ... why was the federal response so flawed?
Group shows FEMA anticipated Katrina's destruction of New Orleans | Michael Roston | Published: Wednesday June 27, 2007
A major report published Wednesday by a Washington, DC-based watchdog shows that the Federal Emergency Management Agency anticipated the destruction that would result from a major hurricane striking New Orleans, yet failed to follow through on its own internal warnings.
"FEMA’s disaster planning was based on a set of predictions that proved to be remarkably accurate. In 2000-2001, FEMA looked at a population of New Orleans that was over 1.3 million people and predicted that when a catastrophic hurricane struck, the city would be flooded with 14-17 feet of water. One million people would evacuate and 250-350,000 people would be trapped in the city," according to the report, The Best Laid Plans: The Story of How the Government Ignored Its Own Gulf Coast Hurricane Plans.
The report, published by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, is based on 7,500 documents that were released to the group by the Department of Homeland Security in whole or in part. A key documents was the 'Southeast Louisiana Catastrophic Hurricane Plan,' which CREW called "strikingly comprehensive."
"The documents CREW received from its FOIA request reveal failures by FEMA and the federal government at nearly every stage of preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina," the report notes. "Why, despite longstanding anticipation of a hurricane strike on New Orleans, significant forewarning of Katrina’s imminent landfall, the potential impact on the Gulf Coast, as well as the extensive planning in the days leading up to Katrina’s landfall was the federal response so flawed?" ...
A major report published Wednesday by a Washington, DC-based watchdog shows that the Federal Emergency Management Agency anticipated the destruction that would result from a major hurricane striking New Orleans, yet failed to follow through on its own internal warnings.
"FEMA’s disaster planning was based on a set of predictions that proved to be remarkably accurate. In 2000-2001, FEMA looked at a population of New Orleans that was over 1.3 million people and predicted that when a catastrophic hurricane struck, the city would be flooded with 14-17 feet of water. One million people would evacuate and 250-350,000 people would be trapped in the city," according to the report, The Best Laid Plans: The Story of How the Government Ignored Its Own Gulf Coast Hurricane Plans.
The report, published by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, is based on 7,500 documents that were released to the group by the Department of Homeland Security in whole or in part. A key documents was the 'Southeast Louisiana Catastrophic Hurricane Plan,' which CREW called "strikingly comprehensive."
"The documents CREW received from its FOIA request reveal failures by FEMA and the federal government at nearly every stage of preparation for and response to Hurricane Katrina," the report notes. "Why, despite longstanding anticipation of a hurricane strike on New Orleans, significant forewarning of Katrina’s imminent landfall, the potential impact on the Gulf Coast, as well as the extensive planning in the days leading up to Katrina’s landfall was the federal response so flawed?" ...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)