Here is the part 2 of her article. Read on and learn my man!
November 29, 2006
The Highjacking of a Nation
Part 2: The Auctioning of Former Statesmen & Dime a Dozen Generals
By Sibel Edmonds
“The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes.”- - Justice Felix Frankfurter
It used to be the three branches - congress, the executive, and the courts - that we considered the make-up of our nation’s federal government. And some would point to the press as a possible fourth branch, due to the virtue of its influence in shaping our policies. Today, more and more people have come to view corporate and foreign lobby firms, with their preponderant clout and enormous power, as the official fourth branch of our nation’s government. Not only do I agree with them, I would even take it a step further and give it a higher status it certainly deserves.
Operating invisibly under the radar of media and public scrutiny, lobby groups and foreign agents have become the ‘epicenter’ of our government, where former statesmen and ‘dime a dozen generals’ cash in on their connections and peddle their enormous influence to the highest bidders turned clients. These groups’ activities shape our nation’s policies and determine the direction of the flow of its taxpayer driven wealth, while to them the interests of the majority are considered irrelevant, and the security of the nation is perceived as inconsequential.
In Part1 of this series I used Saudi influence via its lobby and foreign agents by default as a case to illustrate how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, override the interests and security of the entire nation. This illustrative model case involved three major elements: the purchasing of a few ‘dime a dozen generals,’ bidding high in the auctioning of ‘former statesmen,’ and buying one or two ex-congressmen turned lobbyists. In addition, the piece emphasized the importance of the “Military Industrial Complex (MIC),” which became a de facto ‘foreign agent’ by the universally recognized principle of ‘mutual benefit.’
This article will attempt to illustrate the functioning of the above model in the case of another country, the Republic of Turkey, and its set of agents and operators in the U.S. In doing so, I want to emphasize the importance of separating the populace of example nations - Saudi Arabia, Israel, Turkey, Pakistan… - from their regimes and select key participating actors. As is the case with our nation, they too suffer the consequences of their regime’s self-serving policies and conduct. Not only that, they also have to endure what they consider ‘U.S. imposed policies’ that further the interests of only a few. Think of it this way, the majority of us in the States do not see the infamous and powerful neocon cabal as the chosen and accepted representatives of our nation’s values and objectives. We do not want to be perceived and judged based on the actions of a few at Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. The same is valid for these nations’ citizenry; so let not their corrupt and criminal regimes be the basis of our judgment of them.
Moreover, as we all know, those subject to criticism in these articles have mastered the art of spinning when it comes to the media and propaganda. The Israeli lobby is quick to stamp all factually backed criticism as ‘anti-Semitic’ and attack it as such. The Turkish lobby, in this regard, as with everything else, follows its Israeli mentors; they label all dissent and criticism as anti-Turkey, or, Kurdish or Armenian propaganda; while the Saudi lobby goes around kicking and screaming ‘anti-Muslim propaganda.’ I am not known to be ‘politically correct’ and am often criticized for it. I readily accept that and all responsibilities associated with it. I am not seeking a position as a diplomat, neither am I serving any business, organization, or media channel furthering a particular ideology. This is me, saying it as I see it; no more, no less. By the end of this series it should be obvious, at least for many, that the selection of the nations encompasses varied sides and affiliations. Moreover, the main purpose, and the target of these commentaries, goes to the heart of our own government and its epicenter; lobbyists and the MIC.
* * * *
Many Americans, due to the effective propaganda and spin machine of Turkey’s agents in the U.S., and relentless efforts by high-level officials and lobbying groups on Turkish networks’ payroll, do not know much about Turkey; its position and importance in the areas of terrorism, money laundering, illegal arms sales, industrial and military espionage, and the nuclear black-market. Not many people in the States would name Turkey among those nations that threaten global security, the fight against terrorism, nuclear proliferation, or the war on drugs. For the purpose of this article it is necessary to have at least a rudimentary knowledge of Turkey, its strategic location within global criminal networks, its various networks and entities operating behind seemingly legitimate fronts, and its connection to the military and political machine in the U.S.
For many Americans Turkey is one of the closest allies of the United States; a most important member of NATO; a candidate for EU membership; and the only Middle-Eastern close ally and partner of Israel. Some acknowledge Turkey’s highly prized status in the United States due to its location as the artery connecting Europe to Asia, its cross borders with Iran, Iraq and Syria to its East and South, with the Balkan states to its west, and with the Central Asian nations to its north and northeast. Others may recognize the country as one of the top U.S. customers for military technology and weapons.
Interestingly enough, these same qualities and characteristics which make Turkey an important ally and strategic partner for the nation states, make it extremely crucial and attractive to global criminal networks active in transferring illegal arms and nuclear technology to rogue states; in transporting Eastern Narcotics, mainly from Afghanistan through the Central Asian states into Turkey, where it is processed, and then through the Balkan states into Western Europe and the U.S.; and in laundering the proceeds of these illegal operations via its banks and those on the neighboring island of Cyprus.
The Real Lords of the Poppy Fields
It is a known fact that there often is a nexus between terrorism and organized crime. Terrorists use Narco-traficking and international crime to support their activities. Frequently, the same criminal gangs involved in narcotics smuggling have links to other criminal activities, such as illegal arms sales, and to terrorist groups. The Taliban's link to the drug trade is irrefutable. In 2001, a report by the U.N. Committee of Experts on Resolution 1333 for sanctions against the Taliban stated that “funds raised from the production and trade of opium and heroin are used by the Taliban to buy arms and war materials and to finance the training of terrorists and support the operation of extremists in neighboring countries and beyond.”
Afghanistan supplies almost 90% of the world's heroin, which is the country’s main cash crop, contributing over $3 billion a year in illegal revenues to the Afghan economy, which equals 50% of the gross national product. In 2004, according to the U.S. state department, 206,000 hectares were cultivated, a half a million acres, producing 4,000 tons of opium. “It is not only the largest heroin producer in the world, 206,000 hectares is the largest amount of heroin or of any drug that I think has ever been produced by any one country in any given year,” says Robert Charles, former assistant secretary of state for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, overseeing anti-drug operations in Afghanistan.
Heroin trafficking is also the main source of funding for the al-Qaeda terrorists. A Time Magazine article in August 2004 reported that al-Qaeda has established a smuggling network that is peddling Afghan heroin to buyers across the Middle East, Asia, and Europe, and in turn is using the drug revenues to purchase weapons and explosives. The article states: “…al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies are increasingly financing operations with opium sales. Anti-drug officials in Afghanistan have no hard figures on how much al-Qaeda and the Taliban are earning from drugs, but conservative estimates run into tens of millions of dollars.” Anti-drug officials say the only way to cut off al-Qaeda's pipeline is to attack it at the source: by destroying the poppy farms themselves. This year, Afghanistan's opium harvest is expected to exceed 3,600 tons—enough to produce street heroin worth $36 billion.
Key congressional leaders have been pressing the Pentagon to crack down on the major drug traffickers in Afghanistan upon learning that Al Qaeda is relying more than ever on illicit proceeds from the heroin trade. Congressional investigators who returned from the region in 2004 found that traffickers are providing Osama bin Laden and other terrorists with heroin as funds from Saudi Arabia and other sources dry up. "We now know Al Qaeda's dominant source of funding is the illegal sale of narcotics," said Rep. Kirk-IL, a member of the House Appropriations foreign operations subcommittee, as reported by Washington Times. Rep. Kirk added that Bin Laden's Al Qaeda terror organization is reaping $28 million a year in illicit heroin sales.
It is puzzling to observe that in reporting this major artery of terrorists’ funding, the U.S. mainstream media and political machine do not dare to go beyond the poppy fields of Afghanistan and the fairly insignificant low level Afghan warlords overseeing the crops. Think about it; we are talking about nearly $40 billion worth of products in the final stage. Do you believe that those primitive Afghan warlords, clad in shalvars, sporting long ragged beards, and walking with long sticks handle transportation, lab processing, more transportation, distribution, and sophisticated laundering of the proceeds? If yes, then think again. This multi billion-dollar industry requires highly sophisticated networks and people. So, who are the real lords of Afghanistan’s poppy fields?
For Al Qaeda’s network Turkey is a haven for its sources of funding. Turkish networks, along with Russians’, are the main players in these fields; they purchase the opium from Afghanistan and transport it through several Turkic speaking Central Asian states into Turkey, where the raw opium is processed into popular byproducts; then the network transports the final product into Western European and American markets via their partner networks in Albania. The networks’ banking arrangements in Turkey, Cyprus and Dubai are used to launder and recycle the proceeds, and various Turkish companies in Turkey and Central Asia are used to make this possible and seem legitimate. The Al Qaeda network also uses Turkey to obtain and transfer arms to its Central Asian bases, including Chechnya.
Since the 1950s Turkey has played a key role in channeling into Europe and the U.S. heroin produced in the "Golden Triangle" comprised of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. These operations are run by mafia groups closely controlled by the MIT (Turkish Intelligence Agency) and the military. According to statistics compiled in 1998, Turkey’s heroin trafficking brought in $25 billion in 1995 and $37.5 billion in 1996. That amount makes up nearly a quarter of Turkey’s GDP. Only criminal networks working in close cooperation with the police and the army could possibly organize trafficking on such a scale. The Turkish government, MIT and the Turkish military, not only sanctions, but also actively participates in and oversees the narcotics activities and networks.
In July 1998, Le Monde Diplomatique reported that in an explosive document made public at a press conference in Istanbul, the MIT, Turkish Intelligence Agency, accused Turkey’s national police, of having “provided police identity cards and diplomatic passports to members of a group which, in the guise of anti-terrorist activities, traveled to Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Hungary and Azerbaijan to engage in drug trafficking”. MIT provided a list of names of some of the traffickers operating under the protection of the police. The Turkish police returned the compliment and handed over a list of named drug traffickers employed by the MIT!
In January 1997, Tom Sackville, minister of state at the British Home Office, stated that 80% of the heroin seized in Britain came from Turkey, and that his government was concerned by reports that members of the Turkish police, and even of the Turkish government, were involved in drug trafficking.
In an article published in Drug Link Magazine, Adrian Gatton cites the case of Huseyin Baybasin, the famous Turkish heroin kingpin now in jail in Holland. Baybasin explains: “I handled the drugs which came through the channel of the Turkish Consulate in England,” and he adds: “I was with the Mafia but I was carrying this out with the same Mafia group in which the rulers of Turkey were part.” The article also cites a witness statement given to a UK immigration case involving Baybasin’s clan, and states that Huseyin Baybasin had agreed to provide investigators with information about what he knew of the role of Turkish politicians and officials in the heroin trade. The article quotes Mark Galeotti, a former UK intelligence officer and expert on the Turkish mafia, “Since the 1970s, Turkey has accounted for between 75 and 90 per cent of all heroin in the UK. The key traffickers are Turks or criminals who operate along that route using Turkish contacts.” In 2001, Chris Harrison, a senior UK Customs officer in Manchester, told veteran crime reporter Martin Short that Customs could not get at the Turkish kingpins because they are “protected” at a high level.
In 1998, the highly official International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) of the U.S. State Department, revealed that “about 75% of the heroin seized in Europe is either produced in, or derives from, Turkey”, that “4 to 6 tons of heroin arrive from there every month, heading for Western Europe” and that “a number of laboratories for the purification of the opium used in transforming the basic morphine into heroin are located on Turkish soil". The report stresses that Turkey is one of the countries most affected by money-laundering, which takes place particularly via the countries of the ex-Soviet Union, such as Uzbekistan, Azerbaijan, and Turkmenistan, through the medium of casinos, the construction industry, and tourism. INCSR’s 2006 report cites Turkey as a major transshipment point and base of operations for international narcotics traffickers and associates trafficking in opium, morphine base, heroin, precursor chemicals and other drugs.
We know that Al Qaeda and Taliban’s main source of funding is the illegal sale of narcotics. Based on all the reports, facts, and expert statements, we know that Turkey is a major, if not the top, player in the transportation, processing, and distribution of all the narcotics derived from the Afghan poppies, and as a result, it is the major contributing country to Al Qaeda. Yet, to date, more than five years into our over exhaustive ‘war on terror propaganda’, have we heard any mentioning of, any tough message to, any sanction against, or any threat that was issued and targeted at Turkey?
We all know of our president’s ‘selective evilization’ of countries that have been ‘chosen’ to be on our hit list. But how many of us know of our government’s ‘selective go free cards’ that have been issued to those ‘ally countries’ that directly fund and support the terrorist networks? In fact, our government would rather move heaven and earth, gag ‘whistleblowers’ with direct knowledge of these facts, classify congressional and other investigative reports, create a media black-out on these ‘allies’ terrorist supporting activities, than do the right thing; do what it really takes to counter terrorism.
…and the WMDs we actually located & have known about
In his 2002 State of the Union address, President Bush declared he would keep “the world's most destructive weapons" from Al Qaeda and its allies by keeping those weapons from evil governments. Later he told a campaign audience in Pennsylvania, “We had to take a hard look at every place where terrorists might get those weapons and one regime stood out: the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein.” Well, the Iraqi WMD that never was!
Here is what CIA Director Porter Goss said bluntly before the Senate Intelligence Committee in February 2004, “It may be only a matter of time before Al Qaeda or other groups attempt to use chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons. We must focus on that.” And we know that he knows; has known for the longest time!
Seymour Hersh in his March 2003 article quotes Robert Gallucci, a former United Nations weapons inspector who is now dean of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service, “Bad as it is with Iran, North Korea, and Libya having nuclear-weapons material, the worst part is that they could transfer it to a non-state group. That’s the biggest concern, and the scariest thing about all this. There’s nothing more important than stopping terrorist groups from getting nuclear weapons.”
Although numerous prestigious reports by agencies and organizations such as IAEA, and news articles in the European media, have clearly established Turkey, and various international networks operating in and out of Turkey, as major players within the global nuclear black-market and illegal arms sales, the relevant agencies and main media in the U.S. have maintained a completely silent and hands off position.
Nuclear black-market related activities depend on Turkey for manufacturing nuclear components, and on its strategic location as a transit point to move goods and technology to nations such as Iran, Pakistan, and others. Not only that, Turkey’s status and close relationship with the U.S. enables it to obtain (steal) technology and information from the U.S.
Lying at the crossroads not only between Europe and Asia, but also between the former Soviet Union and the Middle East, Turkey is already a well-established transit zone for illicit goods, including nuclear material and illegal weapons sales. According to a report by Turkish Atomic Energy Authority (TAEA), at least 104 nuclear smuggling incidents had occurred in the past eight years in Turkey. For instance, in September 1999, 5 Kilograms of Uranium enriched to 4.6 percent were confiscated from an international smuggling ring in Turkey, which included four Turkish, one Azerbaijani, and three Kazakhstani citizens. The report cites over one hundred incidents like this, and these are only cases that have been intercepted and reported.
Turkey played a major role in Pakistan and Libya’s illicit activities in obtaining nuclear technologies. In June 2004, Stephen Fidler, a reporter for Financial Times reported that in 2003, Turkish centrifuge motors and converters destined for Libya's nuclear weapons program turned up in Tripoli aboard a ship that had sailed from Dubai. One of those detained individuals in this incident, a ‘respected and successful’ Turkish Businessman, Selim Alguadis, was cited in a public report from the Malaysian inspector-general of police into the Malaysian end of a Pakistani-led clandestine network that supplied Libya, Iran and North Korea with nuclear weapons technologies, designs and expertise. According to the report, “he supplied these materials to Libya." Mr. Alguadis also confessed that he had on several occasions met A Q Khan, the disgraced Pakistani scientist who has admitted transmitting nuclear expertise to the three countries. Selim Alguadis remains a successful businessman in Turkey with companies in several other countries. He was released immediately after being turned over to Turkish authorities. His partner, another well-known and internationally recognized wealthy businessman, Gunes Cire, also actively participated in transferring nuclear technology and parts to Iran, Pakistan and North Korea. Although under investigation by several international communities, Alguadis and his partners continued to roam free in Turkey and conduct their illegitimate operations via their ‘legit international business’ front companies.
David Albright and Corey Hinderstein of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) identify Turkey’s major role in the nuclear black-market. According to their report, workshops in Turkey made the centrifuge motor and frequency converters used to drive the motor and spin the rotor to high speeds. These workshops imported subcomponents from Europe, and they assembled these centrifuge items in Turkey. Under false end-user certificates, these components were shipped from Turkey to Dubai for repackaging and shipment to Libya.
Turkey’s illegal arms smuggling activities are not limited to Europe and the Middle East; many of these activities reach U.S. soil. According to a report published by the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, in April 2004 the Italian police searched a container destined for the port of New York onboard a Turkish ship at the port of Tauro during a routine customs inspection, sparked by discrepancies between the various customs declarations. Inside the container more than 8,000 AK47 assault rifles, 11 submachine guns, and magazines worth over seven million dollars were discovered.
Our tough talking president works very hard to sound convincing when he says ‘we have to take a hard look at every place where terrorists might get those weapons;’ in fact, he has succeeded in fooling many into believing those words. However, while he was determined to move heaven and earth to get our nation into a war and a quagmire with a country that did NOT possess ‘those weapons,’ he refused and continues to refuse to look at his own ‘allies-packed backyard’ where he would find a few that not only do possess ‘those weapons,’ but also distribute and sell them to the highest bidders no matter what their affiliation.
* * * *
Curiously enough, despite these highly publicized reports and acknowledgements of Turkey’s role in these activities, Turkey continues to receive billions of dollars of aid and assistance annually from the United States. With its highly placed co-conspirators and connections within the Pentagon, State Department and U.S. Congress, Turkey never has to fear potential sanctions or meaningful scrutiny; just like Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. The criminal Turkish networks continue their global criminal activities right under the nose of their protector, the United States, and neither the catastrophe falling upon the U.S. on September Eleven, nor their direct and indirect role and ties to this terrorist attack, diminish their role and participation in the shady worlds of narcotics, money laundering and illegal arms transfer.
The ‘respectable’ Turkish companies established and operate bases in Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan and other similar former soviet states. Many of these front companies, disguised under construction and tourism entities, have received millions of dollars in grants from the U.S. government, allocated to them by the U.S. congress, to establish and operate criminal networks throughout the region; among their networking partners are Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and the Albanian Mafia. While the U.S. government painted Islamic charity organizations as the main financial source for Al Qaeda terrorists, it was hard at work trying to cover up the terrorists’ main financial source: narcotics and illegal arms sales. Why?
For years and years, information and evidence being collected by the counterintelligence operations of certain U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies has been prevented from being transferred to criminal and narcotics divisions, and from being shared with the Drug Enforcement Agency and others with prosecutorial power. Those with direct knowledge have been prevented from making this information available and public by various gag orders and invocation of the State Secrets Privilege. Why?
Is this due to the fact that the existence and survival of many U.S. allies; Turkey, almost all Central Asian nations, and after the September Eleven attack, Afghanistan; greatly depend on cultivating, processing, transporting, and distributing these illegal substances? Is it caused by the fact that a major source of income for those who procure U.S. weapons and technology, our military industrial complex’s bread and butter, is being generated from this illegal production and illegal dealings? Or, is it the fear of exposing our own financial institutions, lobbying firms, and certain elected and appointed officials, as beneficiaries?
When it comes to criminal and shady global networks most people envision either Mafiosi like entities who keep to themselves and are separated from society, or, street level gangster-like criminals. Contrary to these expectations, the top tier Turkish criminal networks consist mainly of respectable looking businessmen, some of whom are among the top international businessmen, diplomats, politicians, and scholarly individuals. Their U.S. counterparts are equally respected and recognizable; some of whom are high-level appointed bureaucrats within the State Department and the Pentagon; some are elected officials, and others consist of the combination of the two who have now set up their own companies and lobbying groups.
The American Turkish Council (ATC)
Operating tax-free and under the radar is one of the most powerful “non-profit” associations in the U.S., the American Turkish Council (ATC). Some who are familiar with its operations and players describe it as ‘Mini AIPAC;’ this description aces it. ATC followed the AIPAC model; with the direct help of AIPAC & JINSA, it created a base out of which to stretch its tentacles, reaching the highest echelons of our government. While the ATC is an association in name and in charter, the reality is that it and other affiliated associations are the U.S. government, lobbyists, foreign agents, and MIC. Investigative journalist, John Stanton, correctly describes the ATC as an extraordinary group of elite and interconnected Republicans, Democrats and corporate and military heavyweights who are spearheading one of the most ambitious strategic gambits in U.S. history.
Included in ATC’s management, board of directors, and advisors; in addition to Turkish individuals of ‘interest;’ is a dizzying array of U.S. individuals. The ATC is led by Ret. General Brent Scowcroft, who serves as Chairman of the Board; George Perlman of Lockheed Martin, the Executive Vice President; other board members include: Former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger, Ret. General Elmer Pendleton, Ret. General Joseph Ralston, Ret. Col. Preston Hughes, Alan Colegrove of Northrop Grumman, Frank Carlucci of Carlyle Group, Christine Vick of Cohen Group, Representative Robert Wexler, Former Rep. Ed Whitfield…Basically many formers; statesmen, ‘dime a dozen generals,’ and representatives.
On the members - paying clients – side; their list includes all the MIC’s who’s who, such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman; the Washington Lobby scene’s who’s who; The Cohen Group, The Livingston Group, Washington Group International…
Of course, there are also many Turkish companies that are members of the ATC. Most of these companies have branches and operations in Libya, Dubai, Azerbaijan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Turkmenistan. Although the official listings of their businesses are cited as ‘construction,’ ‘real estate’, ‘manufacturing,’ and ‘tourism’; the main activities of these businesses are known to be related to global illegal arms sales and narcotic processing and trafficking. These companies provide necessary fronts and channels to launder proceeds. Curiously enough, hundreds of millions of dollars have been granted by the United States government, approved by the congress, to these Turkish companies under the guise of various ‘U.S. Central Asian development programs;’ and ‘Iraq & Afghanistan reconstruction programs.’
Stanton notes: ‘ATC is joined in the creation of the New EuroAsia by the American Azerbaijan Chamber of Commerce (AACC). AACC’s Honorary Council of Advisors just happens to have General Scowcroft and the following persons of significance: Henry Kissinger and James Baker III. Former Council members include Dick Cheney and Richard Armitage, and Board of Trustee members include media-overkill subject Richard Perle of AEI, and Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas.’
The MIC Factor
In part1 we discussed the MIC as ‘agents by default;’ marriages and loyalties based on ‘mutual benefit;’ our previous example was Saudi Arabia, top customer of U.S. weaponry. Well, Turkey only tails the Saudis slightly in that category; between 1992 and 1996, Turkey was the second largest importer of weaponry, spending more than $7 billion in four years. A report by the World Policy Institute shows that Turkey is the third largest recipient of U.S. military aid, behind Israel and Egypt. Between 1994 and 2003, Turkey took delivery of more than $6.8 billion in U.S. weaponry and services.
In fiscal year 1989, U.S. aid to Turkey was $563,500,000. According to a Multi National Monitor Report, in 1991, Turkey received more than $800 million in U.S. aid, “an exceptional return” on its $3.8 million investment in Washington lobbyists. At the time, International Advisors, INC. (Douglas Feith & Richard Perle lobbying firm as registered agents for Turkey) was paid more than $1 million for representing Turkey in the U.S. for the purpose of securing these types of deals. In 2003, Turkey received a $1 billion aid package. During this period their registered and known lobbyists were the Livingston Group, headed by the former Speaker of the House Bob Livingston, and Solarz Associates, headed by a formerly powerful Representative, Stephen Solarz. Turkey, from 2000 to 2004, for only four years, paid Livingston $9 million for his lobbying services. What did the Republic of Turkey get for its $2 million per year investment in Ex-Congressman Livingston’s services?
A Joint Report by the Federation of American Scientists and the World Policy Institute found that the vast majority of U.S. arms transfers to Turkey were subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. In many cases, these taxpayer funds are supporting military production and employment in Turkey, not in the United States. Of the $10.5 billion in U.S. weaponry delivered to Turkey since 1984, $8 billion in all has been directly or indirectly financed by grants and subsidized loans provided by the U.S. government. Many of the largest deals - such as Lockheed Martin's sale of 240 F-16s to the Turkish air force and the FMC Corporation's provision of 1,698 armored vehicles to the Turkish army - involve co-production and offset provisions which steer investments, jobs, and production to Turkey as a condition of the sale. For example, Turkey's F-16 assembly plant in Ankara - a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) - employs 2,000 production workers, almost entirely paid for with U.S. tax dollars.
Let’s recap the above data: Not only does our government, actually, our taxpayers, subsidize $8 billion of Turkey’s $10 billion weapons purchases; the production of this weaponry and the associated employment occurs not in the U.S., but overseas, in Turkey. We, the taxpayers, are subsidizing these purchases; our nation readily transfers its technology to a country that ranks high in global narcotics, terrorist and WMD related activities; while a select few MIC related firms such as Lockheed and the pimping middlemen, the lobbyists, get fatter and richer.
One Stop Shop: The Cohen Group
Like many other former statesmen, William Cohen, former Secretary of Defense, dived into the business of lobbying and consulting, and created his own Washington firm, The Cohen Group, which works for some of the largest companies in the defense industry, such as Lockheed Martin, and serves numerous foreign players. The Cohen Group is one of the primary and most active members of the American Turkish Council (ATC). Cohen’s client, Lockheed Martin, happens to be on the board of ATC, in addition to being listed as ATC’s top paying client.
The group claims on its Website that its principals have "a century and a half of combined experience in the Congress, the Defense Department, the State Department, the White House, and state and local governments" and that they “have developed extensive expertise and relationships with key international political, economic, and business leaders and acquired invaluable experiences with the individuals and institutions that affect our clients' success abroad.” Abroad indeed. With a few ‘dime a dozen generals’ and former statesmen, the firm owes its phenomenal speedy success to interests ‘abroad’ and of course, the MIC! Let’s look, with great amazement, I hope, at how this ingenious lobby venture serves as foreign agent for several influences without having to register as such; with complete immunity against any scrutiny.
According to Intelligence Online, in its March 27, 2006 issue, Cohen accompanied Bush on his trip to India and Pakistan in March 2006. The Cohen Group is very active in India; Joseph Ralston, Cohen’s Vice Chairman, led two delegations of U.S. Defense Chiefs to India the previous year. The trips were organized in conjunction with the U.S. India Business Council; among the participants were Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.
On June 9, 2006, Intelligence Online reports ‘already operating in India, the Cohen Group headed by William Cohen, has just opened an office in Beijing... Since 2003 the Cohen Group has equally been employing Christine Vick. She is a former Vice President of Kissinger Associates; the consultancy founded by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, and had been in charge of the firm’s Chinese business.’
Prior to the October 2005 release of Paul Volcker's report on violations of the United Nations' Iraq oil-for-food program, the Australian wheat exporter AWB Limited hired Cohen’s firm. AWB paid approximately $A300 million in trucking fees on its wheat contracts to a Jordanian company, Alia, which owns no trucks! The funds were funnelled to Saddam’s regime. AWB hired Cohen Group as part of its ‘strategy, ’ code-named ‘Project Rose’, to deal with the UN inquiry headed by Paul Volcker and corruption allegations made against it by U.S. wheat farmers and ‘hostile US politicians.’ Cohen Group is not a law firm; what kind of services and representation is it providing for this criminal case?
So who are the key players at Cohen’s lobby firm, giving it its value? Well of course, a handful of powerful formers; in addition to Cohen as the top principal we have former Undersecretary of State Mark Grossman, and two formerly high-level ‘dime a dozen generals:’ General Joseph Ralston and General Paul Kern; let’s briefly look at them; shall we?
Ret. General Paul Kern
Cohen Group senior counselor is retired general Paul J. Kern, a former head of the Army Materiel Command, who recently served on a panel convened by the Defense Department to recommend improvements in how it acquires weapons systems; of course, a topic of great interest to Cohen clients.
Pentagon’s Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment Panel , DAPAP, was created to recommend changes in the awarding of military contracts. Over half of this panel is executives of large defense corporations. Among the Committee’s six members are Frank Cappuccio, VP of Lockheed Martin, and retired General Kern, who is the Senior Counselor of the Cohen Group!
When the Pentagon is informed of wasteful practices, it commonly ignores them. Congressman Walter Jones, (R-N.C.) is quoted as understating, "We’ve got an agency that is not doing its job of being a watchdog for the taxpayers." Retired Army Reserve officer Paul Fellencer Sr. complained to the Pentagon’s fraud hot line last year about $200-million worth of outrageous overpayments for ordinary supplies. Pentagon investigators never bothered to call him and dismissed his tip as "unsubstantiated," the news service said.
One wonders how many American citizens are aware of the fact that a ‘dime a dozen general’ such as Kern, who happens to be a Senior Counsel of a lobby firm with foreign interests and MIC representation, who happens to sit on the board of Lockheed Martin, gets to sit on a panel that monitors and advises on awarding military contracts to the private MIC companies by the Pentagon. Would it take an absolute genius to figure out that this is ‘putting a fox in charge of the hen house’? If not, then how could this get past the decision makers at the Pentagon? How come our lawmakers, those in charge of ensuring the checks and balances in our government, those we consider our representatives, sit there either unaware or unbothered by this red flag visible from a hundred miles away? What happened to ‘investigative journalists with good noses;’ were they all inflicted by congested sinuses at the same time?
Fmr. Gen. Joseph Ralston
General Joseph Ralston, one of Cohen Group’s Vice Chairmen, is on the board of Lockheed Martin, which paid the Cohen Group $550,000 in 2005, according to a Lockheed filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Ralston is also a member of the 2006 Advisory Board of the American Turkish Council (ATC), and one of Turkey’s top advocates. If you think this ‘dime a dozen general’ ended one career and removed himself from the U.S. government by becoming ‘the foreign agent man,’ think again after reading the following.
On August 28, 2006, the U.S. State Department appointed the former U.S. Air Force General, current Vice Chairman of the Cohen Group, board member of American Turkish Council, registered lobbyist for Lockheed Martin, Joseph Ralston, as a “Special Envoy” for countering the Kurdistan Worker’s Party (PKK)! Lo and behold, Ralston’s appointment came as Turkey was finalizing the purchase of 30 new Lockheed Martin F-16 aircraft valued at $3 billion, and as Turkey was due to make its decision on the $10 billion purchase of the new Lockheed Martin F-35 JSF aircraft. Coincidentally, the U.S. Congress approved the sale of the F-16s to Turkey in October 2006, shortly after Ralston’s return from Turkey.
While the implications of Ralston’s appointment caused a major stir within the Kurdish community and organizations, mainly pointing to Ralston’s position with the Turkish lobby in the U.S. (he is on the board of ATC), and within Turkey’s own communities, pointing to Ralston’s position with Lockheed Martin (he is on the board of Lockheed Martin), our own media, watchdog organizations, and congress let this gargantuan conflict of interest pass under the radar.
Our government sent this man, Ralston, as a special envoy to help resolve the highly critical Northern Iraq situation with possible dire consequences in the near future. Considering Ralston’s livelihood and his loyalties, as a member of the board of the directors of Lockheed Martin, as the vice chairman of a lobbying firm with foreign interests, as an advisor and board member for the most powerful Turkish Lobby group, ATC, who did this man represent while in Turkey as the special envoy? What interests did he really represent; Iraq’s situation, Lockheed’s livelihood, which depends on further conflicts and bloodshed; the corrupt and criminal government of Turkey and its representation via ATC; or, the furthering of the Cohen Group’s future pimping opportunities?
Why in the world did no one within the U.S. mainstream media give even the slightest coverage of this conflict of interest? Why did no one, Democrat or Republican, in our congress make a peep? Why haven’t we heard anyone asking Ralston the most important question, in dire need of an answer: ‘Who’s your daddy Ralston; boy?’ Ralston’s position is no different than what is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as: “A person conceived and born out of wedlock.” With the possibility of any one of four daddies, and without the benefit of a DNA test, how do we go about determining Ralston’s real daddy?
Fmr. Undersecretary Marc Grossman
The second Vice Chairman of Cohen’s firm is Marc Grossman, who was the U.S. Undersecretary for Political Affairs in the State Department from 2001 until 2005. From November 1994 to June 1997, he served as U.S. Ambassador to Turkey. In January 2005 Grossman resigned from his position and joined the Cohen Group. In late December 2005, Grossman joined Ihlas Holding, a large and alleged shady Turkish company which is also active in several Central Asian countries. Grossman is reported to receive $100,000 per month for his advisory position with Ihlas.’ Most and foremost, Grossman is known for his extraordinarily cozy relationship with Turkey and Israel; followed by Pakistan.
Here is Grossman as the key speaker at an ATC conference in March 2002; while Undersecretary of State; and here it is followed by Grossman’s visit to Turkey in December 2002, to approve the $3 billion U.S. aid to Turkey for the Iraq Cooperation deal. There he goes again, Grossman back to Turkey in December 2003 re: approval of Turkey’s eligibility to participate in tenders for Iraq’s reconstruction! Here is Grossman as the key speaker at an ATC Conference held at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in December 2004, while Undersecretary. Here is Grossman as the guest of honor and key speaker at the American Turkish Society dinner in New York in February 2005, while Undersecretary. Here he is again, at the lavish Turkish Ottoman Dinner Gala in November 2005. Here is Grossman at the award dinner gala by the Turkish lobby group, the Assembly of American Turkish Association (ATAA), in Chicago, receiving his award in November 2005. Here is Grossman as the key speaker at the ATC annual conference in March 2006, and later, in June 2006, at the MERIA Conference to discuss Turkey’s importance to the U.S. & Israel. This list can go on for pages and pages; but I believe you all get it; right?
Here is a comment by Wolfowitz during his visit to Turkey: ”I'm delighted to be back in Turkey and so is my colleague Marc Grossman, who feels like Turkey is a second home.” Second home indeed, Mr. Grossman!
Please do not make the grave and naive mistake of assuming that Grossman found and obtained his highly lucrative and questionable positions after his resignation in January 2005. Within two months after his confident resignation, this boy got the vice chairmanship of the Cohen Group. Only six months later, Grossman ended up securing a ‘special advisory’ position for a foreign company that reported his monthly fee at $100,000 a month. The industrious Grossman seems to be juggling so many balls simultaneously: numerous foreign sponsored dinner speeches, the demanding pimping activities of Cohen’s firm, the very ‘special advising’ of a shady foreign company…
We all have a pretty good idea how long and how much work it takes to secure that level of income and those positions. Did Grossman beat the odds and get lucky as soon as he got out of the State Department? Did he hit the jackpot? Or, did he diligently and industriously work at it, while in his position as the ambassador to Turkey and as Deputy Secretary of State? Did he sell his soul while under his oath of office? Did he sell our government’s soul? Did he sell our nation and its interests? If so; for what and how much?
* * * *
Long gone are the days when generals were content to retire and go back home where they held their heads high as honorable patriots and heroes who had served their nation; where they marched in their towns’ parades as proud distinguished men and women who had fulfilled their duty to the people. Today, as we clearly see, they perceive themselves and their authority as a commodity; they go about marketing their worth (nationally and internationally; foreign and domestic) long before they leave their positions as public servants.
The same goes for many of our statesmen. While in office, Grossman and others like him appear to have one objective in mind and in action: to make sure that their future employer who is waiting for them on the other side of the revolving door will receive special and lucrative arrangements so that they can be compensated handsomely later.
In Part1, we briefly described the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws; and the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) of 1995, which was passed to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. The article emphasized that both of these cosmetic laws are filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny, and have serious loopholes and limitations.
The Cohen Group is an excellent case, illustrating the futility of FARA, since the firm does not have to be registered. They can claim that Turkey is not their ‘direct’ client; they can argue that they are not getting paid ‘directly’ by the government of Turkey or any other foreign entity or government. They certainly can; no matter that Grossman receives hundreds of thousands of dollars from a dubious Turkish company. Does Cohen discount Grossman’s Vice Chairmanship salary accordingly? No matter that half a million dollars per year from their client Lockheed Martin is mainly for services provided to Turkey, and having the group’s second chairman serve on Lockheed’s board is another way to get around all restrictions. The incestuous relationship twists and turns: The Cohen Group on the board of ATC, The Cohen Group a paying member client of ATC, The Cohen Group as Lockheed’s lobbyist, Cohen’s men on the board of Lockheed, Lockheed on the board of ATC, Lockheed also a paying client of ATC…How is your head; spinning yet?
We are proud of the large turnout at the ballot box for the midterm elections a few weeks ago; a sign of participatory citizenship. Perhaps we’ll be repeating this phenomenon, if not increasing it, for the presidential elections in two years; another means to demonstrate our ‘democratic government process in action’ for badly needed change. But who really runs our country? Who really shapes our public policies and determines the flow of our hard-earned tax money entrusted to our government? If you had the patience to go through this article, which sheds light on only a fragment of what really takes place behind our backs, within the halls of our government, in all three branches, you would start questioning your significance as a voter and taxpayer, and you would begin wondering whether you are governed by who you think you are.
The foreign influence, the lobbyists, the current highly positioned civil servants who are determined future ‘wanna be’ lobbyists, and the fat cats of the Military Industrial Complex, operate successfully under the radar, with unlimited reach and power, with no scrutiny, while selling your interests, benefiting from your tax money, and serving the highest bidders regardless of what or who they may be. This deep state seems to operate at all levels of our government; from the President’s office to Congress, from the military quarters to the civil servants’ offices. Let’s let Marcus Cicero’s timeless warning from over two thousand years ago put the finishing touch on this article:
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder[er] is less to fear.”- - Marcus Tullius Cicero
# # # #
Sibel Edmonds is the founder and director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC). Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI. During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her case have been blocked by the assertion of “State Secret Privilege”; the Congress of the United States has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification by the Department of Justice. Ms. Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani; and has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, and a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University. PEN American Center awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman's Own First Amendment Award.
© Copyright 2006, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. Information in this release may be freely distributed and published provided that all such distributions make appropriate attribution to the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor By Sibel Edmonds
This article looks like a lot of facts and figures with the logic to go with it. I don't think Sibel Edmonds need much introduction. If you don't know, try a search on her.
November 15, 2006
THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION
Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor
By Sibel Edmonds
In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington warned that America must be constantly awake against “the insidious wiles of foreign influence…since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
Today, foreign influence, that most baneful foe of our republican government, has its tentacles entrenched in almost all major decision making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government machine. It does so not secretly, since its self-serving activities are advocated and legitimized by highly positioned parties that reap the benefits that come in the form of financial gain and positions of power.
Foreign governments and foreign-owned private interests have long sought to influence U.S. public policy. Several have accomplished this goal; those who are able and willing to pay what it takes. Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying influence in Washington DC. They have the required recipe down pat: get yourself a few ‘Dime a Dozen Generals,’ bid high in the ‘former statesmen lobby auction’, and put in your pocket one or two ‘ex-congressmen turned lobbyists’ who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve.
The most important facet of this influence to consider is what happens when the active and powerful foreign entities’ objectives are in direct conflict with our nation’s objectives and its interests and security; and when this is the case, who pays the ultimate price and how. There is no need for assumptions of hypothetical situations to answer these questions, since throughout recent history we have repeatedly faced the dire consequences of the highjacking of our foreign and domestic policies by these so-called foreign agents of foreign influence.
Let’s illustrate this with the most important recent case, the catastrophe endured by our people; the September Eleven terrorist attacks. Let’s observe how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, overrode the interests and security of the entire nation; how thousands of victims and their loved ones were kicked aside to serve the interests of a few; foreign influence and its agents.
Senator Graham’s Revelation
It has been established that two of the 9/11 hijackers had a support network in the U.S. that included agents of the Saudi government, and that the Bush administration and the FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship.
In his book, "Intelligence Matters," Senator Bob Graham made clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties in the House and Senate intelligence committees.
Here is an excerpt from Senator Graham’s statement from the July 24, 2003 congressional record on the classified 27 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11: “The most serious omission, in my view, is part 4 of the report, which is entitled Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters. Those 27 pages have almost been entirely censured [sic]….The declassified version of this finding tells the American people that our investigation developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. In other words, officials of a foreign government are alleged to have aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on our country on September 11, which took over 3,000 lives.”
In his book Graham reveals, “Our investigators found a CIA memo dated August 2, 2002, whose author concluded that there is incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists within the Saudi government. On September 11, America was not attacked by a nation-state, but we had just discovered that the attackers were actively supported by one, and that state was our supposed friend and ally Saudi Arabia.” He then cites another case, “We had discovered an FBI asset who had a close relationship with two of the terrorists; a terrorist support network that went through the Saudi Embassy; and a funding network that went through the Saudi Royal family.”
The most explosive revelation in Graham’s book is the following statement with regard to the administration’s attitude on page 216: “It was as if the President’s loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America’s safety.” Further, he states that he asked the FBI to undertake a review of the Riggs Bank records on the terrorists’ money trail, to look at other Saudi companies with ties to al-Qaeda, to plan for monitoring suspect Saudi interests in the United States; however, Graham adds: “To my knowledge, none of these investigations have been completed…Nor do we know anything else about what I believe to be a state-sponsored terrorist support network that still exists, largely undamaged, within the United States.”
What Graham is trying to establish in his book and previous public statements in this regard, and doing so under state imposed ‘secrecy and classification’, is that the classification and cover up of those 27 pages is not about protecting ‘U.S. national security, methods of intelligence collection, or ongoing investigations,’ but to protect certain U.S. allies. Meaning, our government put the interests of certain foreign nations and their U.S. beneficiaries far above its own people and their interests. While Saudi Arabia has been specifically pointed to by Graham, other countries involved have yet to be identified.
In covering up Saudi Arabia’s direct role in supporting Al Qaeda, the 9/11 Commission goes even a few steps further than the congress and the Executive Branch. The report claims "there is no convincing evidence that any government financially supported al-Qaeda before 9/11." Their report ignores all the information provided by government officials to Congress, as well as volumes of published reports and investigations by other nations, regarding Muslim and Arab regimes that have supported al Qaeda. It completely disregards the terrorist lists of the Treasury and State Departments, which have catalogued the Saudi government's decades of support for Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.
Why in the world would the United States government go so far to protect Saudi Arabia in the face of what itself declares to be the biggest security threat facing our nation and the world today?
Why is the United States willing to set aside its own security and interests in order to advance the interests of another state?
How can a government that’s been intent upon using the terrorist attacks to carry out many unjustifiable atrocities, prevent bringing to justice those who’ve been established as being directly responsible for it?
More importantly, how is this done in a nation that prides itself as one that operates under governance of the people, by the people, for the people?
How did our government bodies, those involved in drafting and implementing our nation’s policies, evolve into this foreign influence-peddling operation?
In order to answer these questions one must first establish who stands to lose and who stands to gain by protecting Saudi Arabia from being exposed and facing consequences of its involvement in terrorist networks activities. In addition to identifying the nations in question, we must identify the interests as well as the actors; their agents. Let’s look at Saudi Arabia as one of the successful foreign nations that have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying and peddling influence in Washington DC, and identify its hired ‘agents’ and ‘agents by default.’
Foreign Agents by Default
Although when it comes to our complex diplomatic threading with Saudi Arabia the easiest answer appears to be the ‘oil factor,’ upon further inspection the Saudi’s influence and role extends into other areas, such as the Military Industrial Complex and the too familiar Lobbying Games.
According to the report published by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), Saudi Arabia is America’s top customer. Since 1990 the U.S. government, through the Pentagon’s arms export program, has arranged for the delivery of more than $39.6 billion in foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, and an additional $394 million worth of arms were delivered to the Saudi regime through the State Department’s direct commercial sales program. Oil rich Saudi Arabia is a cash-paying customer; a compulsive buyer of our weaponry. The list of U.S. sellers includes almost all the major players such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.
The report by FAS establishes that despite the show of U.S. support demonstrated by this astounding quantity of arms sales, Saudi Arabia’s human rights record is extremely poor; see the U.S. State Department’s 2000 Human Rights Report. Saudi Arabia’s position as a strategic Gulf ally has blinded U.S. officials into approving a level and quality of arms exports that should never have been allowed to a non-democratic country with such a poor human rights record.
Further, there are indications of Saudi’s active role as a player in the nuclear black-market. According to Mohammed Khilewi, first secretary at the Saudi mission to the United Nations until July 1994, the Saudis have sought a bomb since 1975; they sought to buy nuclear reactors from China, supported Pakistan's nuclear program, and contributed $5 billion to Iraq's nuclear weapons program between 1985 and 1990. While the U.S. government vocally opposes the development or procurement of ballistic missiles by non-allies, it has been very quiet in Saudi Arabia’s case, considering the fact that it possesses the longest-range ballistic missiles of any developing country.
The Military Industrial Complex certainly seems to be a winner in having the congressional report pertaining to the Saudi government’s role in supporting the 9/11 terrorist activities being classified. The exposure would have meant grounds for U.S. sanctions and retributions; it would have risked the loss of billions of dollars in revenue from its ‘top customer.’ These companies don’t even have to officially register as foreign agents; after all, their strong loyalty and unbreakable bond with foreign elements exists by default; it is called mutual benefit. They are ‘Foreign Agents by Default.’
This holds true for other parties and players involved within the MIC network; the contractors and the investors. Let’s look at one of these famous and influential players; another foreign agent even if only by default; a man who defended the Saudis against a lawsuit brought by the 9/11 victims’ family members; a man who happens to be the senior counsel for the Carlyle Group, which invests heavily in defense companies and is the nation's 10th largest defense contractor with ties to the Saudi Royal Family, Enron, Global Crossing, among others; James Baker; Papa Bush’s Secretary of State. On the morning of September 11th, 2001, Baker was reportedly at a Carlyle investor conference with members of the Bin Laden family in the Ritz Carlton in Washington DC, while Bush Sr. was on the payroll of the Carlyle group.
The Carlyle Group, a Washington, DC based private equity firm that employs numerous former high-ranking government officials with ties to both political parties, was the ninth largest Pentagon contractor between 1998 and 2003, an ongoing Center for Public Integrity investigation into Department of Defense contracts found. According to this report, overall, six private investment firms, including Carlyle, received nearly $14 billion in Pentagon deals between 1998 and 2003. Considering the fact that Saudi Arabia is the top buyer of the U.S. weapons industry, Carlyle’s investment and its stake, and of course Jimmy Baker’s far reaching influence within the Pentagon and congress, everything seems to come together and fit perfectly to shield this foreign interest no matter the price to be paid by the American public.
The political action committees (PACs) of the biggest defense companies have given $14.2 million directly to federal candidates since Clinton's first presidential bid, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). In 1997 alone the defense industry spent $49.5 million to lobby the nation's decision-makers.
Between 1998 and 2004, for the six-year period, Boeing Company spent more than $57 million in lobbying. For the same period of time, Lockheed Martin poured over $55 million into lobbying activities. Northrop Grumman exceeded both by investing $83 million in lobbying, and based on a report issued by POGO, it contributed over $4 million to individuals and PACs.
With ‘dime a dozen’ generals on their boards of directors, numerous high-powered ex congressmen and senators at their disposal in the ‘K Street Lobby Quarter,’ tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations, and billions of dollars at stake, the Military Industrial Complex surely had all the incentives to act just as foreign agents would, and fight for their highly valued client; the Saudi Government. They appear to have had all the reasons to ensure that the report would not see the light of the day; no matter what the effect on the country, its security, and its interests.
K Street Lobby Quarter
The fact that Saudi Arabia pours large sums into lobbying firms and public relations companies with close ties to congress does not come as a big surprise. The FARA database under the DOJ website lists Qorvis Communications as one of Saudi Arabia’s registered foreign agents. In 2003, for only a six months period, Qorvis received more than $11 million from the Saudi government. Another firm, Loeffler Tuggey Pauerstein Rosenthal LLP, another registered foreign agent, received more than $840,000 for the same six-month period, and the list goes on. Just for this six month period the government of Saudi Arabia paid a total of more than $14 million to 13 lobbying and public relations companies; all registered as foreign agents.
Why do the Saudis spend nearly $20 million per year in lobbying activities in the U.S. via their hired agents? What kind of return on investment are they getting out of the United States Congress?
Let’s take Loeffler’s group and examine its value for the Saudi government, since it was paid over $3 million in three years between 2003 and 2005. The firm was founded by former Republican Congressman Tom Loeffler of Texas. Loeffler served in the Republican Leadership as Deputy Whip, and as Chief Deputy Whip during his third and fourth term. He was a member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee and Budget Committee. In the two Bush campaigns for governor, Loeffler, who contributed $141,000, was the largest donor. In 1998, he served as national co-chair of the Republican National Committee's "Team 100" program for donors of $100,000 or more, and afterwards held the same title during George W. Bush's presidential campaign. Loeffler’s generosity extends to the members of congress as well. In 6 years, he has given more than $185,000 to members of congress, 97% of it going to only Republican members. During the same six-year period, Loeffler’s firm received more than $18 million in lobbying fees.
The firm’s managing director happens to be William L. Ball. Ball served as Chief of Staff to Senators John Tower (R-TX) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA). In 1985, he joined the Reagan Administration as Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs. Later he was assigned to the White House to serve President Reagan as his chief liaison to the Congress. Wallace Henderson is also a Partner; he was Chief Counsel and Chief of Staff to Representative W. J. Tauzin (R-LA), Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator John Breaux (D-LA).
By having foreign agents such as the Loeffler Group, in addition to their foreign agents by default, the MIC, the Saudis seem to have all their bases covered. Former secretaries and deputy secretaries with open access to the current ones, former congressmen and senators who used to be positioned on strategically valuable committees and know the rules of the congressional game, and millions of dollars available to be spent and channeled and re-channeled to various PACs go a long way toward ensuring results. Money counts. Money is needed to bring in votes. Professional skills and discretion are required to get this money to various final destinations. The registered foreign agents, the lobby groups, are geared for this task. The client is happy in the end; so are the foreign agents and the congressional actors.
Other Savvy Nations
Of course, the sanction and legitimization of far reaching foreign influence and strongholds in the U.S., despite the many dire consequences endured by its citizens, is not limited to the government of Saudi Arabia. Numerous well-documented cases can be cited for others such as Turkey, Pakistan, and Israel, to name a few.
I won’t get into the details and history of my own case, where the government invoked the state secrets privilege to gag my case and the congress in order to ‘protect certain sensitive diplomatic relations.’ The country, the foreign influence, in this case was the Republic of Turkey. The U.S. government did so despite the far reaching consequences of burying the facts involved, and disregarded the interests and security of the nation; all to protect a quasi ally engaged in numerous illegitimate activities within the global terrorist networks, nuclear black-market and narcotics activities; an ally who happens to be another compulsive and loyal buyer of the Military Industrial Complex; an ally who happens to be another savvy player in recruiting top U.S. players as its foreign agents and spending million of dollars per year to the lobbying groups headed by many ‘formers.’ Turkey’s agent list includes generals such as Joseph Ralston and Brent Scowcroft, former statesmen such as William Cohen and Marc Grossman, and of course famous ex-congressmen such as Bob Livingston and Stephen Solarz. Turkey too seems to have all its bases covered.
Another well-known and documented case involves Pakistan. Over two decades ago Richard Barlow, an intelligence analyst working for then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney issued a startling report. After reviewing classified information from field agents, he had determined that Pakistan, despite official denials, had built a nuclear bomb. In the March 29, 1993 issue of New Yorker, Seymour Hersh noted that “even as Barlow began his digging, some senior State Department officials were worried that too much investigation would create what Barlow called embarrassment for Pakistan.” Barlow's conclusion was politically inconvenient. A finding that Pakistan possessed a nuclear bomb would have triggered a congressionally mandated cutoff of aid to the country, and it would have killed a $1.4-billion sale of F-16 fighter jets to Islamabad. A few months later a Pentagon official downplayed Pakistan's nuclear capabilities in his testimony to Congress. When Barlow protested to his superiors, he was fired. A few years later, the Executive Branch would slap Barlow with the State Secrets Privilege.
As we all now know, Pakistan provided direct nuclear assistance to Iran and Libya. During the Cold War, the U.S. put up with Pakistani lies and deception about their nuclear activities, it did not enforce its restrictions on Pakistan's nuclear program when it counted, and as a result Pakistan ended up with a U.S.-made nuclear weapons system. Yet again, after 9/11, the Bush administration issued a waiver ending the implementation of almost all sanctions on Pakistan because of the perceived need for Pakistani assistance in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, who ironically were brought to power by direct U.S. support in the 1980s in the first place.
Weiss, in the May-June 2004 issue of the Bulletin states: “We are essentially back where we were with Pakistan in the 1980s. It is apparent that it has engaged in dangerous nuclear mischief with North Korea, Iran, and Libya (and perhaps others), but thus far without consequences to its relationship with the United States because of other, overriding foreign policy considerations--not the Cold War this time, but the war on terrorism.” He continues: “But now there is a major political difference. It was one thing for Pakistan, a country with which the United States has had good relations generally, to follow India and produce the bomb for itself. It is quite another for Pakistan to help two-thirds of the "axis of evil” to get the bomb as well.”
FARA & LDA
An agent of a ‘foreign principal’ is defined as any individual or organization which acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal, or whose activities are directed by a foreign principal who engages in political activities, or acts in a public relations capacity for a foreign principal, or solicits or dispenses any thing of value within the United States for a foreign principal, or represents the interests of a foreign principal before any agency or official of the U.S. government.
In 1938, in response to the large number of German propaganda agents in the pre-WWII U.S., Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws. The Act requires every agent of a foreign principal to register with the Department of Justice and file forms outlining its agreements with, income from, and expenditures on behalf of the foreign principal. Any agent testifying before a committee of Congress must furnish the committee with a copy of his most recent registration statement. The agent must keep records of all his activities and permit the Attorney General to inspect them. However, as is the case with many laws, the Act is filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny.
There are a number of exemptions. For example, persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or of a religious, academic, and charitable nature are exempt. Any agent who is engaged in lobbying activities and is registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) is exempt. The LDA of 1995 was passed after decades of effort to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. However, LDA also has serious and important loopholes and limitations that can be summed up as: Inadequate Disclosure, Inadequate Enforcement, and Inadequate Regulation of Conduct. The recent congressional scandals make this point very clear.
In addition, neither act deals with an important issue: Conflict of Interest. Many of these agents, with their loyalty to the foreign hand that feeds them, end up being appointed to various positions, commissions and special envoys by our government. Recall Kissinger and his appointment to head the 9/11 Commission, and of course the recent revelation by Woodward on his advisory position to the current White House. Take a look at Jimmy Baker’s current appointment on the Iraq commission. Same goes for the father of all the ‘dime a dozen generals’, Brent Scowcroft, and one of his new protégés, General Joseph Ralston. In short, neither FARA nor LDA creates meaningful oversight, control, or enforcement; neither deals with conflict of interest issues, and neither provides any deterrence or consequences for unethical or illegal conduct.
It used to be congressional ‘pork projects’ and ‘corporate influence’ that raised eyebrows now and then; here and there. Gone are those days. Today the unrestricted and uncontrollable money game and influence peddling tricks within the major decision-making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government have reached new heights; yet, no raised eyebrows are registered. Sadly, today, a new version of ‘The Manchurian Candidate’ would have to be produced as a documentary.
The other day I received a request to sign on to a petition put forth by a group of 9/11 family members urging the congress to reopen the investigations of 9/11 and declassify the infamous 27-pages which deal with foreign governments, U.S. allies, that provided support for those who carried out the attacks on our nation. My heart goes out to them. I do sympathize with them. I am known to take on similar propositions and methods of activism myself. However, looking at the realities, seeing what it takes to get things done in Washington, realizing how this beast works in the Real Sin City, I would encourage them to look at the root cause, rather than the symptoms. There are only two ways I can see that can bring about what they have been fighting for and what the majority of us desire to see in terms of bringing about Truth, Oversight, and Accountability; Justice.
The family members, and their supporters, us, either have to tackle the major cause; the corruption of our government officials via unrestricted and undisciplined ‘revolving doors’ and ‘foreign influence & lobby’ practices, and push for expedient meaningful reforms by the new ambitious congress, and have them prove to us their worth. Or, they may as well give up their long-held integrity, go bid high for one or two former statesmen, hire a few dime a dozen generals, and buy themselves a couple of ex-congressmen turned lobbyists; that will do the job.
# # # #
Sibel Edmonds is the founder and director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC). Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI. During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her case have been blocked by the assertion of “State Secret Privilege”; the Congress of the United States has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification by the Department of Justice. Ms. Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani; and has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, and a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University. PEN American Center awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman's Own First Amendment Award.
© Copyright 2006, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. Information in this release may be freely distributed and published provided that all such distributions make appropriate attribution to the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.
postamble();
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
November 15, 2006
THE HIGHJACKING OF A NATION
Part 1: The Foreign Agent Factor
By Sibel Edmonds
In his farewell address in 1796, George Washington warned that America must be constantly awake against “the insidious wiles of foreign influence…since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.”
Today, foreign influence, that most baneful foe of our republican government, has its tentacles entrenched in almost all major decision making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government machine. It does so not secretly, since its self-serving activities are advocated and legitimized by highly positioned parties that reap the benefits that come in the form of financial gain and positions of power.
Foreign governments and foreign-owned private interests have long sought to influence U.S. public policy. Several have accomplished this goal; those who are able and willing to pay what it takes. Those who buy themselves a few strategic middlemen, commonly known as pimps, while in DC circles referred to as foreign registered agents and lobbyists, who facilitate and bring about desired transactions. These successful foreign entities have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying influence in Washington DC. They have the required recipe down pat: get yourself a few ‘Dime a Dozen Generals,’ bid high in the ‘former statesmen lobby auction’, and put in your pocket one or two ‘ex-congressmen turned lobbyists’ who know the ropes when it comes to pocketing a few dozen who still serve.
The most important facet of this influence to consider is what happens when the active and powerful foreign entities’ objectives are in direct conflict with our nation’s objectives and its interests and security; and when this is the case, who pays the ultimate price and how. There is no need for assumptions of hypothetical situations to answer these questions, since throughout recent history we have repeatedly faced the dire consequences of the highjacking of our foreign and domestic policies by these so-called foreign agents of foreign influence.
Let’s illustrate this with the most important recent case, the catastrophe endured by our people; the September Eleven terrorist attacks. Let’s observe how certain foreign interests, combined with their U.S. agents and benefactors, overrode the interests and security of the entire nation; how thousands of victims and their loved ones were kicked aside to serve the interests of a few; foreign influence and its agents.
Senator Graham’s Revelation
It has been established that two of the 9/11 hijackers had a support network in the U.S. that included agents of the Saudi government, and that the Bush administration and the FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship.
In his book, "Intelligence Matters," Senator Bob Graham made clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties in the House and Senate intelligence committees.
Here is an excerpt from Senator Graham’s statement from the July 24, 2003 congressional record on the classified 27 pages of the Congressional Joint Inquiry into 9/11: “The most serious omission, in my view, is part 4 of the report, which is entitled Finding, Discussion and Narrative Regarding Certain Sensitive National Security Matters. Those 27 pages have almost been entirely censured [sic]….The declassified version of this finding tells the American people that our investigation developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. In other words, officials of a foreign government are alleged to have aided and abetted the terrorist attacks on our country on September 11, which took over 3,000 lives.”
In his book Graham reveals, “Our investigators found a CIA memo dated August 2, 2002, whose author concluded that there is incontrovertible evidence that there is support for these terrorists within the Saudi government. On September 11, America was not attacked by a nation-state, but we had just discovered that the attackers were actively supported by one, and that state was our supposed friend and ally Saudi Arabia.” He then cites another case, “We had discovered an FBI asset who had a close relationship with two of the terrorists; a terrorist support network that went through the Saudi Embassy; and a funding network that went through the Saudi Royal family.”
The most explosive revelation in Graham’s book is the following statement with regard to the administration’s attitude on page 216: “It was as if the President’s loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America’s safety.” Further, he states that he asked the FBI to undertake a review of the Riggs Bank records on the terrorists’ money trail, to look at other Saudi companies with ties to al-Qaeda, to plan for monitoring suspect Saudi interests in the United States; however, Graham adds: “To my knowledge, none of these investigations have been completed…Nor do we know anything else about what I believe to be a state-sponsored terrorist support network that still exists, largely undamaged, within the United States.”
What Graham is trying to establish in his book and previous public statements in this regard, and doing so under state imposed ‘secrecy and classification’, is that the classification and cover up of those 27 pages is not about protecting ‘U.S. national security, methods of intelligence collection, or ongoing investigations,’ but to protect certain U.S. allies. Meaning, our government put the interests of certain foreign nations and their U.S. beneficiaries far above its own people and their interests. While Saudi Arabia has been specifically pointed to by Graham, other countries involved have yet to be identified.
In covering up Saudi Arabia’s direct role in supporting Al Qaeda, the 9/11 Commission goes even a few steps further than the congress and the Executive Branch. The report claims "there is no convincing evidence that any government financially supported al-Qaeda before 9/11." Their report ignores all the information provided by government officials to Congress, as well as volumes of published reports and investigations by other nations, regarding Muslim and Arab regimes that have supported al Qaeda. It completely disregards the terrorist lists of the Treasury and State Departments, which have catalogued the Saudi government's decades of support for Bin Laden and al-Qaeda.
Why in the world would the United States government go so far to protect Saudi Arabia in the face of what itself declares to be the biggest security threat facing our nation and the world today?
Why is the United States willing to set aside its own security and interests in order to advance the interests of another state?
How can a government that’s been intent upon using the terrorist attacks to carry out many unjustifiable atrocities, prevent bringing to justice those who’ve been established as being directly responsible for it?
More importantly, how is this done in a nation that prides itself as one that operates under governance of the people, by the people, for the people?
How did our government bodies, those involved in drafting and implementing our nation’s policies, evolve into this foreign influence-peddling operation?
In order to answer these questions one must first establish who stands to lose and who stands to gain by protecting Saudi Arabia from being exposed and facing consequences of its involvement in terrorist networks activities. In addition to identifying the nations in question, we must identify the interests as well as the actors; their agents. Let’s look at Saudi Arabia as one of the successful foreign nations that have mastered the art of ‘covering all the bases’ when it comes to buying and peddling influence in Washington DC, and identify its hired ‘agents’ and ‘agents by default.’
Foreign Agents by Default
Although when it comes to our complex diplomatic threading with Saudi Arabia the easiest answer appears to be the ‘oil factor,’ upon further inspection the Saudi’s influence and role extends into other areas, such as the Military Industrial Complex and the too familiar Lobbying Games.
According to the report published by the Federation of American Scientists (FAS), Saudi Arabia is America’s top customer. Since 1990 the U.S. government, through the Pentagon’s arms export program, has arranged for the delivery of more than $39.6 billion in foreign military sales to Saudi Arabia, and an additional $394 million worth of arms were delivered to the Saudi regime through the State Department’s direct commercial sales program. Oil rich Saudi Arabia is a cash-paying customer; a compulsive buyer of our weaponry. The list of U.S. sellers includes almost all the major players such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing.
The report by FAS establishes that despite the show of U.S. support demonstrated by this astounding quantity of arms sales, Saudi Arabia’s human rights record is extremely poor; see the U.S. State Department’s 2000 Human Rights Report. Saudi Arabia’s position as a strategic Gulf ally has blinded U.S. officials into approving a level and quality of arms exports that should never have been allowed to a non-democratic country with such a poor human rights record.
Further, there are indications of Saudi’s active role as a player in the nuclear black-market. According to Mohammed Khilewi, first secretary at the Saudi mission to the United Nations until July 1994, the Saudis have sought a bomb since 1975; they sought to buy nuclear reactors from China, supported Pakistan's nuclear program, and contributed $5 billion to Iraq's nuclear weapons program between 1985 and 1990. While the U.S. government vocally opposes the development or procurement of ballistic missiles by non-allies, it has been very quiet in Saudi Arabia’s case, considering the fact that it possesses the longest-range ballistic missiles of any developing country.
The Military Industrial Complex certainly seems to be a winner in having the congressional report pertaining to the Saudi government’s role in supporting the 9/11 terrorist activities being classified. The exposure would have meant grounds for U.S. sanctions and retributions; it would have risked the loss of billions of dollars in revenue from its ‘top customer.’ These companies don’t even have to officially register as foreign agents; after all, their strong loyalty and unbreakable bond with foreign elements exists by default; it is called mutual benefit. They are ‘Foreign Agents by Default.’
This holds true for other parties and players involved within the MIC network; the contractors and the investors. Let’s look at one of these famous and influential players; another foreign agent even if only by default; a man who defended the Saudis against a lawsuit brought by the 9/11 victims’ family members; a man who happens to be the senior counsel for the Carlyle Group, which invests heavily in defense companies and is the nation's 10th largest defense contractor with ties to the Saudi Royal Family, Enron, Global Crossing, among others; James Baker; Papa Bush’s Secretary of State. On the morning of September 11th, 2001, Baker was reportedly at a Carlyle investor conference with members of the Bin Laden family in the Ritz Carlton in Washington DC, while Bush Sr. was on the payroll of the Carlyle group.
The Carlyle Group, a Washington, DC based private equity firm that employs numerous former high-ranking government officials with ties to both political parties, was the ninth largest Pentagon contractor between 1998 and 2003, an ongoing Center for Public Integrity investigation into Department of Defense contracts found. According to this report, overall, six private investment firms, including Carlyle, received nearly $14 billion in Pentagon deals between 1998 and 2003. Considering the fact that Saudi Arabia is the top buyer of the U.S. weapons industry, Carlyle’s investment and its stake, and of course Jimmy Baker’s far reaching influence within the Pentagon and congress, everything seems to come together and fit perfectly to shield this foreign interest no matter the price to be paid by the American public.
The political action committees (PACs) of the biggest defense companies have given $14.2 million directly to federal candidates since Clinton's first presidential bid, according to the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP). In 1997 alone the defense industry spent $49.5 million to lobby the nation's decision-makers.
Between 1998 and 2004, for the six-year period, Boeing Company spent more than $57 million in lobbying. For the same period of time, Lockheed Martin poured over $55 million into lobbying activities. Northrop Grumman exceeded both by investing $83 million in lobbying, and based on a report issued by POGO, it contributed over $4 million to individuals and PACs.
With ‘dime a dozen’ generals on their boards of directors, numerous high-powered ex congressmen and senators at their disposal in the ‘K Street Lobby Quarter,’ tens of millions of dollars in campaign donations, and billions of dollars at stake, the Military Industrial Complex surely had all the incentives to act just as foreign agents would, and fight for their highly valued client; the Saudi Government. They appear to have had all the reasons to ensure that the report would not see the light of the day; no matter what the effect on the country, its security, and its interests.
K Street Lobby Quarter
The fact that Saudi Arabia pours large sums into lobbying firms and public relations companies with close ties to congress does not come as a big surprise. The FARA database under the DOJ website lists Qorvis Communications as one of Saudi Arabia’s registered foreign agents. In 2003, for only a six months period, Qorvis received more than $11 million from the Saudi government. Another firm, Loeffler Tuggey Pauerstein Rosenthal LLP, another registered foreign agent, received more than $840,000 for the same six-month period, and the list goes on. Just for this six month period the government of Saudi Arabia paid a total of more than $14 million to 13 lobbying and public relations companies; all registered as foreign agents.
Why do the Saudis spend nearly $20 million per year in lobbying activities in the U.S. via their hired agents? What kind of return on investment are they getting out of the United States Congress?
Let’s take Loeffler’s group and examine its value for the Saudi government, since it was paid over $3 million in three years between 2003 and 2005. The firm was founded by former Republican Congressman Tom Loeffler of Texas. Loeffler served in the Republican Leadership as Deputy Whip, and as Chief Deputy Whip during his third and fourth term. He was a member of the powerful Appropriations Committee, Energy and Commerce Committee and Budget Committee. In the two Bush campaigns for governor, Loeffler, who contributed $141,000, was the largest donor. In 1998, he served as national co-chair of the Republican National Committee's "Team 100" program for donors of $100,000 or more, and afterwards held the same title during George W. Bush's presidential campaign. Loeffler’s generosity extends to the members of congress as well. In 6 years, he has given more than $185,000 to members of congress, 97% of it going to only Republican members. During the same six-year period, Loeffler’s firm received more than $18 million in lobbying fees.
The firm’s managing director happens to be William L. Ball. Ball served as Chief of Staff to Senators John Tower (R-TX) and Herman Talmadge (D-GA). In 1985, he joined the Reagan Administration as Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs. Later he was assigned to the White House to serve President Reagan as his chief liaison to the Congress. Wallace Henderson is also a Partner; he was Chief Counsel and Chief of Staff to Representative W. J. Tauzin (R-LA), Chief of Staff to U.S. Senator John Breaux (D-LA).
By having foreign agents such as the Loeffler Group, in addition to their foreign agents by default, the MIC, the Saudis seem to have all their bases covered. Former secretaries and deputy secretaries with open access to the current ones, former congressmen and senators who used to be positioned on strategically valuable committees and know the rules of the congressional game, and millions of dollars available to be spent and channeled and re-channeled to various PACs go a long way toward ensuring results. Money counts. Money is needed to bring in votes. Professional skills and discretion are required to get this money to various final destinations. The registered foreign agents, the lobby groups, are geared for this task. The client is happy in the end; so are the foreign agents and the congressional actors.
Other Savvy Nations
Of course, the sanction and legitimization of far reaching foreign influence and strongholds in the U.S., despite the many dire consequences endured by its citizens, is not limited to the government of Saudi Arabia. Numerous well-documented cases can be cited for others such as Turkey, Pakistan, and Israel, to name a few.
I won’t get into the details and history of my own case, where the government invoked the state secrets privilege to gag my case and the congress in order to ‘protect certain sensitive diplomatic relations.’ The country, the foreign influence, in this case was the Republic of Turkey. The U.S. government did so despite the far reaching consequences of burying the facts involved, and disregarded the interests and security of the nation; all to protect a quasi ally engaged in numerous illegitimate activities within the global terrorist networks, nuclear black-market and narcotics activities; an ally who happens to be another compulsive and loyal buyer of the Military Industrial Complex; an ally who happens to be another savvy player in recruiting top U.S. players as its foreign agents and spending million of dollars per year to the lobbying groups headed by many ‘formers.’ Turkey’s agent list includes generals such as Joseph Ralston and Brent Scowcroft, former statesmen such as William Cohen and Marc Grossman, and of course famous ex-congressmen such as Bob Livingston and Stephen Solarz. Turkey too seems to have all its bases covered.
Another well-known and documented case involves Pakistan. Over two decades ago Richard Barlow, an intelligence analyst working for then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney issued a startling report. After reviewing classified information from field agents, he had determined that Pakistan, despite official denials, had built a nuclear bomb. In the March 29, 1993 issue of New Yorker, Seymour Hersh noted that “even as Barlow began his digging, some senior State Department officials were worried that too much investigation would create what Barlow called embarrassment for Pakistan.” Barlow's conclusion was politically inconvenient. A finding that Pakistan possessed a nuclear bomb would have triggered a congressionally mandated cutoff of aid to the country, and it would have killed a $1.4-billion sale of F-16 fighter jets to Islamabad. A few months later a Pentagon official downplayed Pakistan's nuclear capabilities in his testimony to Congress. When Barlow protested to his superiors, he was fired. A few years later, the Executive Branch would slap Barlow with the State Secrets Privilege.
As we all now know, Pakistan provided direct nuclear assistance to Iran and Libya. During the Cold War, the U.S. put up with Pakistani lies and deception about their nuclear activities, it did not enforce its restrictions on Pakistan's nuclear program when it counted, and as a result Pakistan ended up with a U.S.-made nuclear weapons system. Yet again, after 9/11, the Bush administration issued a waiver ending the implementation of almost all sanctions on Pakistan because of the perceived need for Pakistani assistance in the fight against Al Qaeda and the Taliban, who ironically were brought to power by direct U.S. support in the 1980s in the first place.
Weiss, in the May-June 2004 issue of the Bulletin states: “We are essentially back where we were with Pakistan in the 1980s. It is apparent that it has engaged in dangerous nuclear mischief with North Korea, Iran, and Libya (and perhaps others), but thus far without consequences to its relationship with the United States because of other, overriding foreign policy considerations--not the Cold War this time, but the war on terrorism.” He continues: “But now there is a major political difference. It was one thing for Pakistan, a country with which the United States has had good relations generally, to follow India and produce the bomb for itself. It is quite another for Pakistan to help two-thirds of the "axis of evil” to get the bomb as well.”
FARA & LDA
An agent of a ‘foreign principal’ is defined as any individual or organization which acts at the order, request, or under the direction or control of a foreign principal, or whose activities are directed by a foreign principal who engages in political activities, or acts in a public relations capacity for a foreign principal, or solicits or dispenses any thing of value within the United States for a foreign principal, or represents the interests of a foreign principal before any agency or official of the U.S. government.
In 1938, in response to the large number of German propaganda agents in the pre-WWII U.S., Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) was established to insure that the American public and its lawmakers know the source of propaganda intended to sway public opinion, policy, and laws. The Act requires every agent of a foreign principal to register with the Department of Justice and file forms outlining its agreements with, income from, and expenditures on behalf of the foreign principal. Any agent testifying before a committee of Congress must furnish the committee with a copy of his most recent registration statement. The agent must keep records of all his activities and permit the Attorney General to inspect them. However, as is the case with many laws, the Act is filled with exemptions and loopholes that allow minimization of, and in some cases complete escape from, warranted scrutiny.
There are a number of exemptions. For example, persons whose activities are of a purely commercial nature or of a religious, academic, and charitable nature are exempt. Any agent who is engaged in lobbying activities and is registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) is exempt. The LDA of 1995 was passed after decades of effort to make the regulation and disclosure of lobbying the federal government more effective. However, LDA also has serious and important loopholes and limitations that can be summed up as: Inadequate Disclosure, Inadequate Enforcement, and Inadequate Regulation of Conduct. The recent congressional scandals make this point very clear.
In addition, neither act deals with an important issue: Conflict of Interest. Many of these agents, with their loyalty to the foreign hand that feeds them, end up being appointed to various positions, commissions and special envoys by our government. Recall Kissinger and his appointment to head the 9/11 Commission, and of course the recent revelation by Woodward on his advisory position to the current White House. Take a look at Jimmy Baker’s current appointment on the Iraq commission. Same goes for the father of all the ‘dime a dozen generals’, Brent Scowcroft, and one of his new protégés, General Joseph Ralston. In short, neither FARA nor LDA creates meaningful oversight, control, or enforcement; neither deals with conflict of interest issues, and neither provides any deterrence or consequences for unethical or illegal conduct.
It used to be congressional ‘pork projects’ and ‘corporate influence’ that raised eyebrows now and then; here and there. Gone are those days. Today the unrestricted and uncontrollable money game and influence peddling tricks within the major decision-making and policy producing bodies of the U.S. government have reached new heights; yet, no raised eyebrows are registered. Sadly, today, a new version of ‘The Manchurian Candidate’ would have to be produced as a documentary.
The other day I received a request to sign on to a petition put forth by a group of 9/11 family members urging the congress to reopen the investigations of 9/11 and declassify the infamous 27-pages which deal with foreign governments, U.S. allies, that provided support for those who carried out the attacks on our nation. My heart goes out to them. I do sympathize with them. I am known to take on similar propositions and methods of activism myself. However, looking at the realities, seeing what it takes to get things done in Washington, realizing how this beast works in the Real Sin City, I would encourage them to look at the root cause, rather than the symptoms. There are only two ways I can see that can bring about what they have been fighting for and what the majority of us desire to see in terms of bringing about Truth, Oversight, and Accountability; Justice.
The family members, and their supporters, us, either have to tackle the major cause; the corruption of our government officials via unrestricted and undisciplined ‘revolving doors’ and ‘foreign influence & lobby’ practices, and push for expedient meaningful reforms by the new ambitious congress, and have them prove to us their worth. Or, they may as well give up their long-held integrity, go bid high for one or two former statesmen, hire a few dime a dozen generals, and buy themselves a couple of ex-congressmen turned lobbyists; that will do the job.
# # # #
Sibel Edmonds is the founder and director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (NSWBC). Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI. During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her case have been blocked by the assertion of “State Secret Privilege”; the Congress of the United States has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification by the Department of Justice. Ms. Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani; and has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, and a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University. PEN American Center awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman's Own First Amendment Award.
© Copyright 2006, National Security Whistleblowers Coalition. Information in this release may be freely distributed and published provided that all such distributions make appropriate attribution to the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.
postamble();
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Pakistan, Kenya &
"The ruling elites are concerned that anger over the assassination will take on broader political aims including demands for genuine democratic reform and improved living standards. The political crisis has already impacted on the economy with the Karachi Stock Exchange benchmark 100-share index slumping by 9.6 percent since Monday amid warnings that investors will pull out of Pakistan. Any economic decline will only exacerbate the deep social divide between rich and poor—one third of the population lives below the poverty line of less than $US1 a day. Prices for some essential items, such as vegetables, doubled over the past week amid fears of a transport breakdown and shortages."
THe transport problems and price hike is the one caught my eye in this article. The prices doubling over is worrying. And a very basic food item which grows in your back yard. So, in a country like Pakistan how can that happen. That is due to vegetables not been transported to the markets on time. Read more here.
"The Kenyatta, Moi and Kibaki families are among the three richest in Kenya and have dominated Kenyan politics since independence. According to Africa Confidential, there is talk of a secret succession pact in which Uhuru would take over from Kibaki in 2012. Odinga has been able to appeal for support among sections of the ruling class excluded from this narrow circle around Moi."
Do I see a similarity in the two country systems? This is about the democracy forworded by the WEst (WE in the west) in Kenya. The British were routed out of Kenya in 1963. It was Jomo Kenyatta who became the first President in the new independant state. He was a member of Kikuyu people, who are about 22% of Kenya's total population. Just a local boy whose grandfather was the medicine man of the tribe. To be contd
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
THe transport problems and price hike is the one caught my eye in this article. The prices doubling over is worrying. And a very basic food item which grows in your back yard. So, in a country like Pakistan how can that happen. That is due to vegetables not been transported to the markets on time. Read more here.
"The Kenyatta, Moi and Kibaki families are among the three richest in Kenya and have dominated Kenyan politics since independence. According to Africa Confidential, there is talk of a secret succession pact in which Uhuru would take over from Kibaki in 2012. Odinga has been able to appeal for support among sections of the ruling class excluded from this narrow circle around Moi."
Do I see a similarity in the two country systems? This is about the democracy forworded by the WEst (WE in the west) in Kenya. The British were routed out of Kenya in 1963. It was Jomo Kenyatta who became the first President in the new independant state. He was a member of Kikuyu people, who are about 22% of Kenya's total population. Just a local boy whose grandfather was the medicine man of the tribe. To be contd
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Pakistan: The Beginning of the Storm
Pakistan: The Beginning of the Storm
By S.M. Hussain
01/01/07 "GrandeStrategy " -- -- There has been much analysis and discussion of what is happening in the global war between Islam and the West. Clear analysis somehow seems missing in the mainstream media, or even amongst well regarded analysts and think tanks. For one, we can only see the views and propaganda of one side of the battle taking place in Pakistan. Further, the issues run so deep and touch us so close, that it becomes hard to think and discuss them without being emotionally involved.
At GrandeStrategy, we believe that the fundamental battle taking place in Pakistan is between the secular and western-based educated pro-American elites, against the Islam-championing hard core religious types. The former we shall here on refer to as the Secular Pakistanis, while the latter we shall represent as the Islamist Pakistanis, merely to ease the writing of this article, not to imply any deeper meaning, as to what "Islamists" are or what represents "Secular".
To get deeper into this problem, let us start by looking at the fundamentals within a Marxist analysis. The constituencies that the Secular Pakistanis are rooted in are the upper classes and the upper middle class, and represent the Bourgeoisie. This class has strong roots in Pakistan with the landed classes. At the risk of going-off at a tangent, I'll go deeper into the origins of this landed class. The landed classes in Pakistan go back in history to when the British Raj took over India. To exert control over the vast Subcontinent, the British came up with a plan to divide and rule India by creating a class of landowners, that would owe their position to the British. Thus they went about granting land and setting rules and guidelines to create this petite bourgeoisie. While in other parts of the Subcontinent, the power and influence of this class greatly diminished after partition, in Pakistan, this class not only managed to maintain its power base but to expand it, to the point that they became the new bourgeoisie. While new power groups emerged, such as the industrial class, expatriate Pakistanis, corrupt wealth accumulators and the elite of the armed forces, these groups soon became assimilated to this now thriving elite "melting pot".
These families together represent the heart of Pakistan's ruling class. It may be instructive to paint a typical picture of such a family - education begins at English language schools, graduating with British qualifications such as O Levels and A Levels. Thereafter, one can go off to college abroad or at a top local university. Families usually have at least some relatives living abroad. Career choices include the armed forces, good civilian jobs at top organizations (gotten through family connections), running the family business or pursuing almost any career abroad. Marriage is typically arranged and one favorable choice is within the extended family. Often they marry their own cousins. However, other families of a similar status are also common matchmaker potential.
The Islamist Pakistanis have their roots in the lower and lower middle class of Pakistan. With Pakistan's rapid Malthusian population growth, these classes have expanded faster than it has been possible for the government to adequately support them. These people live hard working lives, at best being able to afford motorcycles. They live from day to day and find life to be an endless struggle. These people by and large do not care about political parties, instinctively knowing that these are but instruments of the elite. They know that their is no real rule of law, that police are their to rob them and that any member of the elite can easily get away by paying off a judge or the policeman. When they manage to go abroad, typically to the Gulf states, they go as modern indentured servants.
These classes typically come from disadvantaged families that either get their eduction through Islamic schools called madrassas or through government run schools. Those that make it, can hope to reach financial advantage either through business, through joining the civil service and gaining wealth through corruption, going abroad (but here as low cost slave-labor, particularly to Arab states) and joining the military.
With the hard economic conditions of the 1990s and the radicalization of the madrassas, these classes have been a steady source of men, materials and financing for the extremists. Many amongst these classes have their sympathies and loyalties with these extremists. Many revere OBL as a savior, and this is reflected in the name Ossama becoming the most popular baby name in Pakistan after the 9/11 attacks. Success of the Islamist Pakistanis thus far is a direct result of being able to channel their anger against the elite, linking the latter to the West's anti-Islam crusade. With no real political channel to bring their boiling anger out, their only channel becomes the Islamist Pakistanis.
Further, the open pro-western stance of the establishment, clampdown on any form of serious dissent, the black and white manner in which the US has come out against Islam, all have colluded to bring matters to a boiling point.
The Secular Pakistanis have not had this level of success with their constituency. Many of their own children, particularly those in their 20s, and a good portion of all ages that have lived abroad, have become increasingly pro-Islam and anti-West. This is the critical problem that could eventually lead to the collapse of the established elite in Pakistan. Within them, the two groups mentioned, the local college-aged pro-Islamist group and the expatriate pro-Islamists need to be analyzed more closely.
The College-Aged Pro-Islamists represent a thorny quandary for the established elite. The problem results from the clear anti-Islam crusade that the US is conducting, their just isn't any ambiguity left to argue against. Further, the establishment has done a poor job in its propaganda, in appropriately socializing their own progeny. Open access to information via the internet has also played a role. The main political outlet for this group are college campuses. With the government crackdown (backed by ISI) of the college campuses, it remains to be seen if this group can reinvent itself elsewhere. For the Islamist Pakistanis, if this group builds an active alliance and joins with the hard-core militant extremists, then it could very well spell the end of Pakistan as Secular Pakistan has known it. However, the likelihood of this happening is less, given that these westernized progeny has as little in common with the militant extremists as Shanghai Chinese would have with a Redneck America.
The expatriate community is another important piece in the chess board. One characteristic is that the expat community is truly radicalized: while in Pakistan proper we find the overwhelming majority of the people somewhere inbetween the two wider positions, the expat Pakistani community is either strongly secular or strongly Islamist. The key problem for the establishment however, is that the Secular expats want to distance themselves and assimilate into their Western hosts while the increasing number is Islamists are rallying and going back in large numbers. They are also better organized and better connected, and perhaps even have more resources backing them up. This group has had a huge hand in the economic prosperity Pakistan has seen post 9/11, as they have brought back skills, money and key contacts to establish marketing channels. If ever the Islamist Pakistanis can unite as a whole, it would be under their banner.
The Pakistan Army is the central institution that runs the country, whether there is a democratic government or not. Militarily, the Pakistan army is well trained and seasoned, adequately armed and excellent at smaller unit combat. At full theater combat Pakistan, like India have developed a mental block. This stems (for both Pakistan and India), perhaps to the fact that the generals are not well trained in their art. Since in British India, the British took the higher positions, their is a deep grained mental block in thinking strategically, and going through with wider plans. The comedy of errors during 1965 is an able testament to this. The 1971 strategy of regional commands was a glaring red light. Further, with the involvement of the Pakistan army in politics and country running, these generals have become corrupt and this has further deteriorated their prowess. The Pakistan Army also breeds linear thinkers. Anybody who has been in close association with the Pakistan Army knows the specific setting they have and the manner in which the specific manner in which they think. Hierarchy and rank are also very important.
The Pakistan army further suffers from insidious inside politics, and with Ayub Khan, Zia-ul-Haq and now Musharraf, this level of politicization has only gone up. General Kiyani's attempt seems to be to somehow rectify this, how far he will be successful in doing so is yet to be seen. Jehangir Karamat's attempt had for some time really helped stall this slide but with Musharraf this has become much worse.
One of the key mistakes that Musharraf made post 9/11 and after joining the US has been within the Pakistan Army. There was huge outrage within the Pakistan Army, and this included many officers, including General Usmani, the man who saved Musharraf's life when he took control of the civilian airport he was being denied landing to during the fiasco with Nawaz Sharif. Musharraf chose to eliminate this opposition by removing "Islamic" style officers, stereotypically "officers with beards". This was a huge move and surprisingly did not receive a lot of media attention, because a significant number of officers where removed. Unfortunately for the Pakistan Army, these were some of the very best men in the Army, some of the most sincere, hardworking and well-trained officers. For many of the other soldiers in the army, this really threw their morale out the window, particularly since they have, ever since joining the army, been told that they have been fighting a "jihad" against India. (This author has literally spent time arguing with a Pakistani soldier who he at length couldn't convince to the contrary, a few years before 9/11).
What has really gone under the radar is that many of these officers, particularly those from the NWFP, have since leaving the army, found their way to the tribal belts, and have joined the rebellion there. If one analyzes the tactics and organization of the Pakistani Taliban, they seem to be somehow differently organized to the Afghan Taliban, even though they are the same force, literally. This, in our opinion, is as a result of the profusion of these Pakistani officers, who have really helped in taking the Taliban organizationally to the next level. This has been one of the factors why the Pakistani Taliban have faired so well in recent years. The tactical retreat from Swat, while a political loss, was also extremely well executed.
With the death of Benazir, the Secular Pakistanis are in disarray, and their allies in Western capitals are in a state of panic. Benazir was the Queen on the chess board for the Western / Secular side. The Pakistan army is in disarray and fraught with internal issues, with their noses too far into Politics. At the same time, rumors are rife of an internal revolt within the army, under apparently a 3 star general. Desertion to the Pakistani Taliban has also become an increasingly steady flow. At Pakdef, the premier forum to gage the pulse of the establishment, members seem less sure of themselves, and somehow have lost those smug comments about how they will crush the tribal belt.
Yet, even with all this, the sheer power of the Pakistani establishment is hard to match for the aspiring Islamist Pakistanis. And even if all else gives way, they still have to contend with General Kiyani, and this gentleman has the brains and conviction to change the face of the game. What will his next move be? Nobody really knows, but the ball is in his (and Musharraf's) court.
S.M. Hussain - m.hussain'at'grandestrategy.com
have read and agree to comments policy as posted here www.informationclearinghouse.info/c1.htm
Yeah, the Secular/Islamist divide creation myth. Typical imperialist propaganda piece. This is basically a Western war against the Pakistani people designed to break up their nation into more manageable parts for the benefit of Western resource companies (primarily oil). These might help:
The plan to topple Pakistan's military?
by Ahmed Quraishi
http://www.globalresearch.ca/ind...ext=va& aid=7709
The Destabilization of Pakistan
by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky
http://www.globalresearch.ca/ind...ext=va& aid=7705
The Islamist/Secularist split is being promoted in Turkey by Western shills as well.
The use of Religion or Ethnic groups to promote imperialist divide and rule has been done before.
Blue | 01.01.08 - 2:21 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The less educated class gravitate to religion in all countries. It works to their own detriment and often to the detriment of the upper class as well when religionists justify violence with religion. It's just as easy for a poor person to interpret what god wants as it is for a rich person.
Anonymous | 01.01.08 - 3:27 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly, the previous comment seems to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Yes, of course the theme of secular versus Islamist has been, and will continue to be exploited. That doesn't invalidate the very succinct and comprehensive historical analysis by Mr. Hussain. The British imperial legacy from the 19th century, in terms of historical consequences everywhere in the Middle East and Central Asia, haunts 21st century geopolitics.
A minor linguistic nit pick with the article, some spell checker has allowed "their" to appear multiple times when "there" was intended. There are a few other editorial slips, which in no way detract from the flow of the ideas. Thank you Mr. Hussain, from a remote American internet and alternate news reader.
Albert Krauss | 01.01.08 - 3:29 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author has a good handle on the goings on in Pakistan.
Musharraf's days are numbered.
The future is uncertain and unpredicatable.
Derek | 01.01.08 - 3:40 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We always back the 'Dictator' that will do our bidding! Saddam, Noriega etc.
Bob Egan | 01.01.08 - 4:11 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poor Sheep.. Here are some facts
IPI gas pipeline should start soon: Musharraf
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.c...how/ 1570652.cms
U.S. Stands in the Way of International Pipeline Deal
http://www.alternet.org/audits/65315/
US opposes IPI gas pipeline project
http://www.paktribune.com/news/i...ex.shtml? 167299
Most American's don't understand the Pakistan elections or political motivation. The Z's want the TAP project. New Puppets are the propaganda tool. Follow the money trail. Cui bono.. is the question to ask. Its not Pakistan, US is Brokering Gas/Oil deals around UN Iran Sanctions. Use common sense. The so called US diplomat is a deer standing in headlights. The pipeline contracts have been signed. Placing a puppet government to reverse deal will become choas. Markets will suffer.
-----------------
Pakistan: Follow the Pipelines
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/n.../ccn/node/ 14247
Iran, Malaysia sign $16B gas deal
http://money.cnn.com/2007/12/26/ ...sion=2007122611
Its the US & Israel playing tricks on you again. Copy and save this. When crude goes up, you will have proof to reasons why.
. | 01.01.08 - 6:21 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Text of fax broadcast:
BHUTTO TOLD FROST THAT OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD. DID THAT GET HER KILLED?
NEW YORK, NEW YORK * 30 DECEMBER 2007 Citizen of the USA Stephen M. St. John addresses the international community in Washington and here in New York City, all members of the US Congress as well as other organizations and individuals, public and private, and, in condoling with the people of Pakistan over the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, and in searching with them for the truth of how and why and by whom she was killed, points to her earthshaking statement during an interview with David Frost two weeks after her triumphant return to Pakistan on 18 October 2007. Bhutto's return to the acclaim of 3 million devotees was marred by an attempt on her life that killed 158 people near her, and two weeks later she appeared on the TV program Frost Over the World and endeavored to satisfy Frost's curiosity as to who would want to kill her by referring to three individuals, one of them "a very key figure in security" who she claimed had "had dealings with Omar Shaikh, the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden"! With typical British sangfroid, Frost showed no reaction to this bombshell statement and steered away from the topic of Bin Laden's death. (See http://www.brasschecktv.com/page...m/page/ 242.html at the 6 minute, 13 second mark.) Bhutto added that she had conveyed to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf the names of the three individuals who she believed were ready, willing and able to stop her by causing internal security to turn a "blind eye" in collusion with unnamed supporters, organizers and financiers. Who are they? Were they unnerved by Bhutto's revelation of Bin Laden's death? After all, Bhutto's announcement of Bin Laden's death dovetails nicely with the widespread belief of experts that his videotaped messages are all fake. This in turn jibes well with Winston Churchill's dictum, "In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies"; and the truth is, a suppository-sized statue of Churchill stands on George W. Bush's desk in the Oval Office to remind him! More ominously, Bhutto's statement that Osama Bin Laden is dead was followed within weeks by John Negroponte's visit to Pakistan, ostensibly to impress on Musharraf the need to let democracy flower and military dictatorship recede; but where Negroponte goes, there are death squads commencing operations, as in El Salvador and Iraq. Does a tiger change his stripes?
Stephen M. St. John
Post Office Box 449
Rockefeller Center
New York, New York 10185
http://www.show-the-house.com
Stephen M. St. John | Homepage | 01.01.08 - 6:44 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Megalomania or Micromanagement?
@ Stephen M. St. John | Homepage | 01.01.08 - 6:44 pm | #
You mention a suppository-sized (!?) statue of
Churchill on Bush's desk. At the risk of being charged with indulging in idle curiosity, I wish to ask, what are the approximate dimensions of that, er, "statue" (cms, inches, etc)?
..............
DC | 01.01.08 - 8:30 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Could that statue be a bougieman?
..........
DC | 01.01.08 - 8:33 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Albert Krauss & Derek, you made it worth my writing it. I've fixed the errors that have been pointed out, but you can find the fixed version only at GrandeStrategy.
I'm quite surprised some here think my article is pro-West! I certainly am not!
S.M. Hussain | Homepage | 01.01.08 - 8:50 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Thank you, the references were insightful.
.. | 01.01.08 - 9:27 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good article!
Whatever the future holds for Pakistan, I hope it breaks away from the yoke and grip of USA and the West. With friends like USA, who needs enemies?
I could never understand why many leaders of Muslim countries pay homage to USA. Pakistan is a nuclear country. Its leaders should be able to tell USA to get lost just as North Korea did and rubbed Bush's nose in dirt. Yet, many allow USA to control them. Muslim countries should unite and stand up against imperial aspirations of USA and its allies.
Veronica | 01.01.08 - 11:02 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veronica: I don't think Pakistan will escape because it will cease to exist. Free Baluchistan will be very U.S. friendly. The Pushtun might calm down when they are united. What will happen to what will be left of Pakistan I don't know. Iraq will be broken up too. Maybe it's good, maybe it's bad. Perhaps it would be better to start with new countries that encompass a people instead of the british-made mess that exists now. However, it is none of my business or that of the U.S.
lizard | 01.01.08 - 11:55 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veronica: The U.S. exerts influence by propping up the weak or illegitimate who then depend on them. The strong they assasinate. Like the mafia, there really isn't a choice. Having nuclear weapons doesn't make that kind of a difference.
lizard | 01.02.08 - 12:00 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to Albert Krauss,
Its an pro-impedialist/anti-imperialist split, not a secular/Islamist split. The latter is a myth, though stimulated by the West and their puppets abroad.
Even here in Turkey, the US has backed the "Islamists" in power, not the "secular" Kemalists because the military is Kemalist and the West wishes to denigrate this pro-Turkish institution.
Even when pro-American generals like Buyukanit are heading the armed forces, they still have the attitude that Turkish interests come first. This is anathema to the US who prefer politicians like the late World Bank employee Turgut Ozel in the eighties who equated Turkish interests with American interests.
Thus we have cries in the imperialist West (from the left and right) for the military to "get out of politics" and thus leave political decisions to American bought politicians, like Bhutto.
Blue | 01.02.08 - 1:38 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
By S.M. Hussain
01/01/07 "GrandeStrategy " -- -- There has been much analysis and discussion of what is happening in the global war between Islam and the West. Clear analysis somehow seems missing in the mainstream media, or even amongst well regarded analysts and think tanks. For one, we can only see the views and propaganda of one side of the battle taking place in Pakistan. Further, the issues run so deep and touch us so close, that it becomes hard to think and discuss them without being emotionally involved.
At GrandeStrategy, we believe that the fundamental battle taking place in Pakistan is between the secular and western-based educated pro-American elites, against the Islam-championing hard core religious types. The former we shall here on refer to as the Secular Pakistanis, while the latter we shall represent as the Islamist Pakistanis, merely to ease the writing of this article, not to imply any deeper meaning, as to what "Islamists" are or what represents "Secular".
To get deeper into this problem, let us start by looking at the fundamentals within a Marxist analysis. The constituencies that the Secular Pakistanis are rooted in are the upper classes and the upper middle class, and represent the Bourgeoisie. This class has strong roots in Pakistan with the landed classes. At the risk of going-off at a tangent, I'll go deeper into the origins of this landed class. The landed classes in Pakistan go back in history to when the British Raj took over India. To exert control over the vast Subcontinent, the British came up with a plan to divide and rule India by creating a class of landowners, that would owe their position to the British. Thus they went about granting land and setting rules and guidelines to create this petite bourgeoisie. While in other parts of the Subcontinent, the power and influence of this class greatly diminished after partition, in Pakistan, this class not only managed to maintain its power base but to expand it, to the point that they became the new bourgeoisie. While new power groups emerged, such as the industrial class, expatriate Pakistanis, corrupt wealth accumulators and the elite of the armed forces, these groups soon became assimilated to this now thriving elite "melting pot".
These families together represent the heart of Pakistan's ruling class. It may be instructive to paint a typical picture of such a family - education begins at English language schools, graduating with British qualifications such as O Levels and A Levels. Thereafter, one can go off to college abroad or at a top local university. Families usually have at least some relatives living abroad. Career choices include the armed forces, good civilian jobs at top organizations (gotten through family connections), running the family business or pursuing almost any career abroad. Marriage is typically arranged and one favorable choice is within the extended family. Often they marry their own cousins. However, other families of a similar status are also common matchmaker potential.
The Islamist Pakistanis have their roots in the lower and lower middle class of Pakistan. With Pakistan's rapid Malthusian population growth, these classes have expanded faster than it has been possible for the government to adequately support them. These people live hard working lives, at best being able to afford motorcycles. They live from day to day and find life to be an endless struggle. These people by and large do not care about political parties, instinctively knowing that these are but instruments of the elite. They know that their is no real rule of law, that police are their to rob them and that any member of the elite can easily get away by paying off a judge or the policeman. When they manage to go abroad, typically to the Gulf states, they go as modern indentured servants.
These classes typically come from disadvantaged families that either get their eduction through Islamic schools called madrassas or through government run schools. Those that make it, can hope to reach financial advantage either through business, through joining the civil service and gaining wealth through corruption, going abroad (but here as low cost slave-labor, particularly to Arab states) and joining the military.
With the hard economic conditions of the 1990s and the radicalization of the madrassas, these classes have been a steady source of men, materials and financing for the extremists. Many amongst these classes have their sympathies and loyalties with these extremists. Many revere OBL as a savior, and this is reflected in the name Ossama becoming the most popular baby name in Pakistan after the 9/11 attacks. Success of the Islamist Pakistanis thus far is a direct result of being able to channel their anger against the elite, linking the latter to the West's anti-Islam crusade. With no real political channel to bring their boiling anger out, their only channel becomes the Islamist Pakistanis.
Further, the open pro-western stance of the establishment, clampdown on any form of serious dissent, the black and white manner in which the US has come out against Islam, all have colluded to bring matters to a boiling point.
The Secular Pakistanis have not had this level of success with their constituency. Many of their own children, particularly those in their 20s, and a good portion of all ages that have lived abroad, have become increasingly pro-Islam and anti-West. This is the critical problem that could eventually lead to the collapse of the established elite in Pakistan. Within them, the two groups mentioned, the local college-aged pro-Islamist group and the expatriate pro-Islamists need to be analyzed more closely.
The College-Aged Pro-Islamists represent a thorny quandary for the established elite. The problem results from the clear anti-Islam crusade that the US is conducting, their just isn't any ambiguity left to argue against. Further, the establishment has done a poor job in its propaganda, in appropriately socializing their own progeny. Open access to information via the internet has also played a role. The main political outlet for this group are college campuses. With the government crackdown (backed by ISI) of the college campuses, it remains to be seen if this group can reinvent itself elsewhere. For the Islamist Pakistanis, if this group builds an active alliance and joins with the hard-core militant extremists, then it could very well spell the end of Pakistan as Secular Pakistan has known it. However, the likelihood of this happening is less, given that these westernized progeny has as little in common with the militant extremists as Shanghai Chinese would have with a Redneck America.
The expatriate community is another important piece in the chess board. One characteristic is that the expat community is truly radicalized: while in Pakistan proper we find the overwhelming majority of the people somewhere inbetween the two wider positions, the expat Pakistani community is either strongly secular or strongly Islamist. The key problem for the establishment however, is that the Secular expats want to distance themselves and assimilate into their Western hosts while the increasing number is Islamists are rallying and going back in large numbers. They are also better organized and better connected, and perhaps even have more resources backing them up. This group has had a huge hand in the economic prosperity Pakistan has seen post 9/11, as they have brought back skills, money and key contacts to establish marketing channels. If ever the Islamist Pakistanis can unite as a whole, it would be under their banner.
The Pakistan Army is the central institution that runs the country, whether there is a democratic government or not. Militarily, the Pakistan army is well trained and seasoned, adequately armed and excellent at smaller unit combat. At full theater combat Pakistan, like India have developed a mental block. This stems (for both Pakistan and India), perhaps to the fact that the generals are not well trained in their art. Since in British India, the British took the higher positions, their is a deep grained mental block in thinking strategically, and going through with wider plans. The comedy of errors during 1965 is an able testament to this. The 1971 strategy of regional commands was a glaring red light. Further, with the involvement of the Pakistan army in politics and country running, these generals have become corrupt and this has further deteriorated their prowess. The Pakistan Army also breeds linear thinkers. Anybody who has been in close association with the Pakistan Army knows the specific setting they have and the manner in which the specific manner in which they think. Hierarchy and rank are also very important.
The Pakistan army further suffers from insidious inside politics, and with Ayub Khan, Zia-ul-Haq and now Musharraf, this level of politicization has only gone up. General Kiyani's attempt seems to be to somehow rectify this, how far he will be successful in doing so is yet to be seen. Jehangir Karamat's attempt had for some time really helped stall this slide but with Musharraf this has become much worse.
One of the key mistakes that Musharraf made post 9/11 and after joining the US has been within the Pakistan Army. There was huge outrage within the Pakistan Army, and this included many officers, including General Usmani, the man who saved Musharraf's life when he took control of the civilian airport he was being denied landing to during the fiasco with Nawaz Sharif. Musharraf chose to eliminate this opposition by removing "Islamic" style officers, stereotypically "officers with beards". This was a huge move and surprisingly did not receive a lot of media attention, because a significant number of officers where removed. Unfortunately for the Pakistan Army, these were some of the very best men in the Army, some of the most sincere, hardworking and well-trained officers. For many of the other soldiers in the army, this really threw their morale out the window, particularly since they have, ever since joining the army, been told that they have been fighting a "jihad" against India. (This author has literally spent time arguing with a Pakistani soldier who he at length couldn't convince to the contrary, a few years before 9/11).
What has really gone under the radar is that many of these officers, particularly those from the NWFP, have since leaving the army, found their way to the tribal belts, and have joined the rebellion there. If one analyzes the tactics and organization of the Pakistani Taliban, they seem to be somehow differently organized to the Afghan Taliban, even though they are the same force, literally. This, in our opinion, is as a result of the profusion of these Pakistani officers, who have really helped in taking the Taliban organizationally to the next level. This has been one of the factors why the Pakistani Taliban have faired so well in recent years. The tactical retreat from Swat, while a political loss, was also extremely well executed.
With the death of Benazir, the Secular Pakistanis are in disarray, and their allies in Western capitals are in a state of panic. Benazir was the Queen on the chess board for the Western / Secular side. The Pakistan army is in disarray and fraught with internal issues, with their noses too far into Politics. At the same time, rumors are rife of an internal revolt within the army, under apparently a 3 star general. Desertion to the Pakistani Taliban has also become an increasingly steady flow. At Pakdef, the premier forum to gage the pulse of the establishment, members seem less sure of themselves, and somehow have lost those smug comments about how they will crush the tribal belt.
Yet, even with all this, the sheer power of the Pakistani establishment is hard to match for the aspiring Islamist Pakistanis. And even if all else gives way, they still have to contend with General Kiyani, and this gentleman has the brains and conviction to change the face of the game. What will his next move be? Nobody really knows, but the ball is in his (and Musharraf's) court.
S.M. Hussain - m.hussain'at'grandestrategy.com
have read and agree to comments policy as posted here www.informationclearinghouse.info/c1.htm
Yeah, the Secular/Islamist divide creation myth. Typical imperialist propaganda piece. This is basically a Western war against the Pakistani people designed to break up their nation into more manageable parts for the benefit of Western resource companies (primarily oil). These might help:
The plan to topple Pakistan's military?
by Ahmed Quraishi
http://www.globalresearch.ca/ind...ext=va& aid=7709
The Destabilization of Pakistan
by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky
http://www.globalresearch.ca/ind...ext=va& aid=7705
The Islamist/Secularist split is being promoted in Turkey by Western shills as well.
The use of Religion or Ethnic groups to promote imperialist divide and rule has been done before.
Blue | 01.01.08 - 2:21 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The less educated class gravitate to religion in all countries. It works to their own detriment and often to the detriment of the upper class as well when religionists justify violence with religion. It's just as easy for a poor person to interpret what god wants as it is for a rich person.
Anonymous | 01.01.08 - 3:27 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firstly, the previous comment seems to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Yes, of course the theme of secular versus Islamist has been, and will continue to be exploited. That doesn't invalidate the very succinct and comprehensive historical analysis by Mr. Hussain. The British imperial legacy from the 19th century, in terms of historical consequences everywhere in the Middle East and Central Asia, haunts 21st century geopolitics.
A minor linguistic nit pick with the article, some spell checker has allowed "their" to appear multiple times when "there" was intended. There are a few other editorial slips, which in no way detract from the flow of the ideas. Thank you Mr. Hussain, from a remote American internet and alternate news reader.
Albert Krauss | 01.01.08 - 3:29 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author has a good handle on the goings on in Pakistan.
Musharraf's days are numbered.
The future is uncertain and unpredicatable.
Derek | 01.01.08 - 3:40 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We always back the 'Dictator' that will do our bidding! Saddam, Noriega etc.
Bob Egan | 01.01.08 - 4:11 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poor Sheep.. Here are some facts
IPI gas pipeline should start soon: Musharraf
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.c...how/ 1570652.cms
U.S. Stands in the Way of International Pipeline Deal
http://www.alternet.org/audits/65315/
US opposes IPI gas pipeline project
http://www.paktribune.com/news/i...ex.shtml? 167299
Most American's don't understand the Pakistan elections or political motivation. The Z's want the TAP project. New Puppets are the propaganda tool. Follow the money trail. Cui bono.. is the question to ask. Its not Pakistan, US is Brokering Gas/Oil deals around UN Iran Sanctions. Use common sense. The so called US diplomat is a deer standing in headlights. The pipeline contracts have been signed. Placing a puppet government to reverse deal will become choas. Markets will suffer.
-----------------
Pakistan: Follow the Pipelines
http://securingamerica.com/ccn/n.../ccn/node/ 14247
Iran, Malaysia sign $16B gas deal
http://money.cnn.com/2007/12/26/ ...sion=2007122611
Its the US & Israel playing tricks on you again. Copy and save this. When crude goes up, you will have proof to reasons why.
. | 01.01.08 - 6:21 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Text of fax broadcast:
BHUTTO TOLD FROST THAT OSAMA BIN LADEN IS DEAD. DID THAT GET HER KILLED?
NEW YORK, NEW YORK * 30 DECEMBER 2007 Citizen of the USA Stephen M. St. John addresses the international community in Washington and here in New York City, all members of the US Congress as well as other organizations and individuals, public and private, and, in condoling with the people of Pakistan over the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, and in searching with them for the truth of how and why and by whom she was killed, points to her earthshaking statement during an interview with David Frost two weeks after her triumphant return to Pakistan on 18 October 2007. Bhutto's return to the acclaim of 3 million devotees was marred by an attempt on her life that killed 158 people near her, and two weeks later she appeared on the TV program Frost Over the World and endeavored to satisfy Frost's curiosity as to who would want to kill her by referring to three individuals, one of them "a very key figure in security" who she claimed had "had dealings with Omar Shaikh, the man who murdered Osama Bin Laden"! With typical British sangfroid, Frost showed no reaction to this bombshell statement and steered away from the topic of Bin Laden's death. (See http://www.brasschecktv.com/page...m/page/ 242.html at the 6 minute, 13 second mark.) Bhutto added that she had conveyed to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf the names of the three individuals who she believed were ready, willing and able to stop her by causing internal security to turn a "blind eye" in collusion with unnamed supporters, organizers and financiers. Who are they? Were they unnerved by Bhutto's revelation of Bin Laden's death? After all, Bhutto's announcement of Bin Laden's death dovetails nicely with the widespread belief of experts that his videotaped messages are all fake. This in turn jibes well with Winston Churchill's dictum, "In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies"; and the truth is, a suppository-sized statue of Churchill stands on George W. Bush's desk in the Oval Office to remind him! More ominously, Bhutto's statement that Osama Bin Laden is dead was followed within weeks by John Negroponte's visit to Pakistan, ostensibly to impress on Musharraf the need to let democracy flower and military dictatorship recede; but where Negroponte goes, there are death squads commencing operations, as in El Salvador and Iraq. Does a tiger change his stripes?
Stephen M. St. John
Post Office Box 449
Rockefeller Center
New York, New York 10185
http://www.show-the-house.com
Stephen M. St. John | Homepage | 01.01.08 - 6:44 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Megalomania or Micromanagement?
@ Stephen M. St. John | Homepage | 01.01.08 - 6:44 pm | #
You mention a suppository-sized (!?) statue of
Churchill on Bush's desk. At the risk of being charged with indulging in idle curiosity, I wish to ask, what are the approximate dimensions of that, er, "statue" (cms, inches, etc)?
..............
DC | 01.01.08 - 8:30 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Could that statue be a bougieman?
..........
DC | 01.01.08 - 8:33 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks Albert Krauss & Derek, you made it worth my writing it. I've fixed the errors that have been pointed out, but you can find the fixed version only at GrandeStrategy.
I'm quite surprised some here think my article is pro-West! I certainly am not!
S.M. Hussain | Homepage | 01.01.08 - 8:50 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.
Thank you, the references were insightful.
.. | 01.01.08 - 9:27 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good article!
Whatever the future holds for Pakistan, I hope it breaks away from the yoke and grip of USA and the West. With friends like USA, who needs enemies?
I could never understand why many leaders of Muslim countries pay homage to USA. Pakistan is a nuclear country. Its leaders should be able to tell USA to get lost just as North Korea did and rubbed Bush's nose in dirt. Yet, many allow USA to control them. Muslim countries should unite and stand up against imperial aspirations of USA and its allies.
Veronica | 01.01.08 - 11:02 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veronica: I don't think Pakistan will escape because it will cease to exist. Free Baluchistan will be very U.S. friendly. The Pushtun might calm down when they are united. What will happen to what will be left of Pakistan I don't know. Iraq will be broken up too. Maybe it's good, maybe it's bad. Perhaps it would be better to start with new countries that encompass a people instead of the british-made mess that exists now. However, it is none of my business or that of the U.S.
lizard | 01.01.08 - 11:55 pm | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veronica: The U.S. exerts influence by propping up the weak or illegitimate who then depend on them. The strong they assasinate. Like the mafia, there really isn't a choice. Having nuclear weapons doesn't make that kind of a difference.
lizard | 01.02.08 - 12:00 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
to Albert Krauss,
Its an pro-impedialist/anti-imperialist split, not a secular/Islamist split. The latter is a myth, though stimulated by the West and their puppets abroad.
Even here in Turkey, the US has backed the "Islamists" in power, not the "secular" Kemalists because the military is Kemalist and the West wishes to denigrate this pro-Turkish institution.
Even when pro-American generals like Buyukanit are heading the armed forces, they still have the attitude that Turkish interests come first. This is anathema to the US who prefer politicians like the late World Bank employee Turgut Ozel in the eighties who equated Turkish interests with American interests.
Thus we have cries in the imperialist West (from the left and right) for the military to "get out of politics" and thus leave political decisions to American bought politicians, like Bhutto.
Blue | 01.02.08 - 1:38 am | #
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Tuesday, January 01, 2008
Questions, Questions & more Questions
Question 1
Which painter and graphic artist, was born in Switzerland in 1879, and described his work as: "An active line on a walk, moving freely without goal"?
Wassily Kandinsky
Piet Mondrian
Gustav Klimt
Paul Klee
Ha Ha Ha Hee Hee Do You know?
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Which painter and graphic artist, was born in Switzerland in 1879, and described his work as: "An active line on a walk, moving freely without goal"?
Wassily Kandinsky
Piet Mondrian
Gustav Klimt
Paul Klee
Ha Ha Ha Hee Hee Do You know?
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Happy New Year
This newscaster ends her report about the fuck ups in Kenya, Pakistan, Iraq etc, by stating this fact, "Thank god this year is over now we can look forword to 2008."
Damn it is that easy to get rid of bad shit just end the year and viola, you are in good times for all.
So this is the new year. Last year this time of the morning I was waking up at Fagan's after a night out. I was living in Barton Hill that time; Fagan's. AS Fagan was having a girl friend I tried to keep away from his place to give them space like, and slept in the garage a few nights.
So here I iz aving it in a nice flat which I havn't done up yet. Good init?
I run out of cheap tobacco and as usual decided to stop smoking until I get it cheap. Last smoke of my own tobacco I did was 24th. Clare came around and I had joint or two with her. Knocked me out a few spaces. Since 24th I just had pipes of ganja. Not bad I have done a few of these abstenances in the past. So I don't have a problem so far. Alice was in Spain last week and she emailed me saying she can get some for me but I didn't encourage her or tell her that I am trying to give up. See what happens. Yeah I think this time there are more chances to get out of it than be there for a bit more and giveup. But the problem is not either giving up or not; it is just that enjoyement I get out of it; the very root of my being. Pahhhgh.
Then I hear the TV going on about this nicorrette advert; someone going on about how your brain cells go to shits when you want to have a smoke and all. Man that started getting on me nerves until I got used to the advert.
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Damn it is that easy to get rid of bad shit just end the year and viola, you are in good times for all.
So this is the new year. Last year this time of the morning I was waking up at Fagan's after a night out. I was living in Barton Hill that time; Fagan's. AS Fagan was having a girl friend I tried to keep away from his place to give them space like, and slept in the garage a few nights.
So here I iz aving it in a nice flat which I havn't done up yet. Good init?
I run out of cheap tobacco and as usual decided to stop smoking until I get it cheap. Last smoke of my own tobacco I did was 24th. Clare came around and I had joint or two with her. Knocked me out a few spaces. Since 24th I just had pipes of ganja. Not bad I have done a few of these abstenances in the past. So I don't have a problem so far. Alice was in Spain last week and she emailed me saying she can get some for me but I didn't encourage her or tell her that I am trying to give up. See what happens. Yeah I think this time there are more chances to get out of it than be there for a bit more and giveup. But the problem is not either giving up or not; it is just that enjoyement I get out of it; the very root of my being. Pahhhgh.
Then I hear the TV going on about this nicorrette advert; someone going on about how your brain cells go to shits when you want to have a smoke and all. Man that started getting on me nerves until I got used to the advert.
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Thursday, December 27, 2007
MI6
Mr Brown our PM says:
""We will not enter into negotiations with these people."" (note these people means Taliban)
And then when the people nosed on to the fact that M16 were discussing with the terrorists at the time of the speech; the home office spokes person said:
"We do not comment on intelligence matters."
Hurmph! That is politics. Say no more. Fucking national security ans all that init?
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
""We will not enter into negotiations with these people."" (note these people means Taliban)
And then when the people nosed on to the fact that M16 were discussing with the terrorists at the time of the speech; the home office spokes person said:
"We do not comment on intelligence matters."
Hurmph! That is politics. Say no more. Fucking national security ans all that init?
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Friday, December 21, 2007
One to all and all to one vs One contrals and the rest will always follow
Many a terms are used to what I am talking about.
I want to see the vision from the basic axioms, to see the actual scene. Do not forget that the logic you use is the one you understand which is always unique to you. But if we see the larger picture of it all, there are some basic axioms, which suffice to convey the basic understanding of it all. That basic logic is unique to each of us and you understand what I am fingering into the keyboard in your logic. Comprende?
When we listen to some one else, who is talking in front of us, we already have a logical understading of the person on the audio/visual side. So do we listen to the other person without bias?
This is a question I will not be able to answer to you OR you will not be able to answer to me. It can be answered to oneself only truthfully. Just fucking think about it and see where you get to in your own logic.
First we need a definition who "one" is. We cannot be basic if we say that one is limited to human. Only way we can make a basic definition is going to animate ( endowed with animal life as distinguished from plant life), plant and inanimate (not endowed with life). See how 'ard it gets when the logic of the common understanding is so complicated we cannot get any where init? What I wanted to say, sweet, is just that there are things with life like me and amoeba. And there are things like fire, water and the dust which does not have any life in them. Hey shit I is going in a yangent like me mate Fagan in many of his explanations about his fish.
You be grade one gold star if you can tell me who this 'one' is?
If you go 'ere you will get General (25 matching dictionaries). Whoea! man but it says in the quick def:
Quick definitions (one)
noun: a single person or thing (Example: "He is the best one")
noun: the smallest whole number or a numeral representing this number (Example: "He has the one but will need a two and three to go with it")
adjective: being a single entity made by combining separate components (Example: "Three chemicals combining into one solution")
adjective: used of a single unit or thing; not two or more
In any way you try to suss it out, you get only one meaning like single unit of many. Am I right? or left? Hang on; that is why they call right and left in politics init? If you be not right you are left means you be wrong huh? I am always left because everyone I meet are right about themselves and I need to be different because I need to be me.
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
I want to see the vision from the basic axioms, to see the actual scene. Do not forget that the logic you use is the one you understand which is always unique to you. But if we see the larger picture of it all, there are some basic axioms, which suffice to convey the basic understanding of it all. That basic logic is unique to each of us and you understand what I am fingering into the keyboard in your logic. Comprende?
When we listen to some one else, who is talking in front of us, we already have a logical understading of the person on the audio/visual side. So do we listen to the other person without bias?
This is a question I will not be able to answer to you OR you will not be able to answer to me. It can be answered to oneself only truthfully. Just fucking think about it and see where you get to in your own logic.
First we need a definition who "one" is. We cannot be basic if we say that one is limited to human. Only way we can make a basic definition is going to animate ( endowed with animal life as distinguished from plant life), plant and inanimate (not endowed with life). See how 'ard it gets when the logic of the common understanding is so complicated we cannot get any where init? What I wanted to say, sweet, is just that there are things with life like me and amoeba. And there are things like fire, water and the dust which does not have any life in them. Hey shit I is going in a yangent like me mate Fagan in many of his explanations about his fish.
You be grade one gold star if you can tell me who this 'one' is?
If you go 'ere you will get General (25 matching dictionaries). Whoea! man but it says in the quick def:
Quick definitions (one)
noun: a single person or thing (Example: "He is the best one")
noun: the smallest whole number or a numeral representing this number (Example: "He has the one but will need a two and three to go with it")
adjective: being a single entity made by combining separate components (Example: "Three chemicals combining into one solution")
adjective: used of a single unit or thing; not two or more
In any way you try to suss it out, you get only one meaning like single unit of many. Am I right? or left? Hang on; that is why they call right and left in politics init? If you be not right you are left means you be wrong huh? I am always left because everyone I meet are right about themselves and I need to be different because I need to be me.
If you cannot find the links in this blog, I have majority of them filed, Email me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)