Canadian Neo Cons - Connecting the Dots

Let’s play connect the dots

The Telegram
Monday,
a citizen’s group suggested that, whatever else the federal Conservatives have done, they haven’t turned off the federal finance taps. Or more to the point, the chefs have changed, but there’s still plenty of gravy to be had.In fact, the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) says that, after reviewing lists of federal grants in fiscal 2006-07, Ottawa awarded $25 billion in grants, contributions and subsidies — a payout equivalent to 11 per cent of all government funding.The CTF tags a number of those funding choices as questionable, and has provided a list of the top 100 recipients — identifying some of the funding as “corporate welfare” and pointing out such things as $47.5 million for the Mont Tremblant ski resort, and $27 million for a Toronto soccer stadium. One of the most interesting investments flagged by the group might have had interesting implications for workers in this province.


No. 22 on the list was big news for Saint John, N.B. And that set us to thinking. Cash injections can skew business — it’s not always obvious, and you can’t always connect the dots directly, but think about this “coincidence.” Atlantic Wallboard Ltd. in New Brunswick is on the list as having received a $35-million conditionally repayable loan from the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency to build a synthetic gypsum wallboard manufacturing plant. The $90-million plant was touted as Canada’s “most modern wallboard operation in Canada” by its main proponent, the J.D. Irving empire.The project was announced in February. Five months later, in July, Lafarge closed its gypsum plant in Corner Brook — at the time, a company spokesman blamed “increasing competition in the Atlantic region along with a slumping wallboard market.” Lafarge, of course, is a massive multinational, and the Corner Brook operation was a tiny blip in the company’s quarterly results, the only mention being: “Strong cost reduction programs have been implemented including the closure of a wallboard plant in Canada in the third quarter.”


Telegram story later revealed that Lafarge had also been exploring an $11-million project to improve the plant, one that would have seen $2.75 million come from the provincial government, and an unconfirmed ACOA investment of $5 million.Looking at the business case, Lafarge decided taking the money didn’t make sense.







Provincial cabinet member Trevor Taylor described it like this: “I’m of the understanding that the observation made by Lafarge was, ‘If we had $20 million we wouldn’t be able to make this work.’” It makes you wonder, of course, if $35 million would have made the difference. Or, in fact, if $35 million had already made the difference, but in a different way.

Maybe it’s an occupational hazard; maybe you just can’t run a gravy train without occasionally getting burned by the spills.
28/11/07

N.B. Watch for the name Thyssen Industries, Canadian conservatives have had a long association with them. Thyssen Industries, along with the Bush clan and I.G. Farben, funded Nazi Germany to such an extent that WWII would not have been possible without North American Corporate aid. It is good to know the roots of fascism, because those who built, caused and created WWII were the corporations and they were never prosecuted.
Not recognizing this is like not knowing your mother or father is a psychopath - you simply repeat their history, devoid of conscience.

Mulroney, MacKay - Dirty Dancing

The Mulroney / Karlheinz Schreiber story is rife with the name MacKay. (Elmer Mackay father, of the current Minister of Defense, Peter MacKay, (Elmer - pictured right in the Mulroney years)

i.e.

MacKay stuck in the middle

Former MP has had a long association with Karlheinz Schreiber
By STEPHEN MAHER
Ottawa Bureau
Fri. Nov 30 - 7:45 AM

From his time as a Brian Mulroney cabinet minister, Elmer MacKay has had a long association with Karlheinz Schreiber. ( File)
Former MP and Solicitor General Elmer MacKay (in photo, listens to lawyers Robert Robert Ladun (centre) and Eddie Greenspan in Toronto in this 1999 photo (below). Ladun was helping Karleheinz Schreiber on a civil suit while Greenspan was battling Schreiber's extradition to Germany. MacKay posted $100,000 as a contribution to Schreiber's bail. (CP)

OTTAWA — Brian Mulroney, Karlheinz Schreiber and Elmer MacKay were once close friends, men at the pinnacle of power, bound together by their pursuit of a common project: an armoured-car factory they wanted to build in Bear Head, Cape Breton.
That failed project was never anything more than a sign by the side of the road outside Port Hawkesbury, but it is the thread that runs through a two-decade saga of backroom dealings and broken trust, a story that ends with men tearing each other’s reputations apart in public.
On Thursday, Mr. Schreiber had his first day of testimony in front of a Commons committee.


Mr. Schreiber, who is doing everything possible to avoid extradition to Germany, told MPs that he gave Brian Mulroney $300,000 in cash in the early 1990s because the former prime minister had promised to help with the Bear Head project. Mr. Mulroney has only said that it was to help with Mr. Schreiber’s pasta-manufacturing business.
But Mr. Schreiber said Thursday that is "nonsense," something dreamed up five years later, presumably to explain the cash payment that Mr. Mulroney was eventually forced to acknowledge.
He said he gave Mr. Mulroney the money for several reasons, including help with the Bear Head project.


Mr. Schreiber, a former arms dealer wanted in Germany in connection with a bribery scandal, testified that he met with Mr. Mulroney a few days before he stepped down as prime minister, in his official residence at Harrington Lake, and agreed to give him $500,000 for his help with the project. Because he didn’t do the work as agreed, he said he only gave him $300,000.
The two men were friends then, but no longer.

...

So why would Schreiber have an incentive to invent a project?" he said. "Because if he gave money to Mulroney while Mulroney (was) still a member of Parliament, is there not a potential for a bribe? That’s the third possibility."
Indeed, Mr. Schreiber left open the possibility Thursday that he was motivated by friendship.
A former staffer of Mr. Mulroney, an old friend from St. Francis Xavier University, told Mr. Schreiber that Mr. Mulroney needed money.
"Fred Doucet told me that he is in desperate shape and needed money so badly that I should help him," Mr. Schreiber said.
That friendship ended, Mr. Schreiber testified Thursday, when he read an affidavit from Mr. Spector, in which Mr. Spector said that Mr. Mulroney killed the Bear Head project in 1990 or 1991.
When Mr. Schreiber learned that, he felt betrayed because, if Mr. Schreiber is to be believed, Mr. Mulroney had taken his money to work on a project that was already dead.
"I looked at the timetable when that happened; I got so mad I cannot even tell you how much I became, because each and everybody from us felt like crooks," Mr. Schreiber said.
The collapse of that friendship has had grim consequences for Mr. Mulroney because Mr. Schreiber, under threat of spending the rest of his life in a German prison, has been speaking to the media, painting a picture that appears calculated to destroy the former prime minister’s reputation.
...
One person who has tried to mend the Mulroney-Schreiber friendship over the years is Elmer MacKay, the father of Defence Minister Peter MacKay. He was ACOA minister and solicitor general in Mr. Mulroney’s government.
Mr. MacKay, an avid proponent of the Bear Head project, has stayed close with both men, even as they became bitter enemies. In 1999, when German authorities were closing in on Mr. Schreiber in Switzerland, Mr. MacKay flew there and brought Mr. Schreiber to his home in Pictou County.
On Thursday, the Globe and Mail and CBC released an e-mail that seems to show Mr. MacKay helped draft a letter of apology from Mr. Schreiber to Mr. Mulroney — an unsuccessful attempt to mend the relationship between the two.
Mr. MacKay has declined to comment on this matter. Mr. Spector said it seems Mr. Mulroney asked him to get the letter from Mr. Schreiber.
"The fact that MacKay was involved in drafting the letter to Mulroney, which Mulroney and Lavoie have been citing as denying everything Schreiber had said before, is very damaging — damaging of Mulroney, not to Elmer," he said. "There’s no crime in helping out Mulroney."
Another former Tory ACOA minister, Senator Lowell Murray, said Thursday he is certain the senior Mr. MacKay was not seeking to profit personally from the Bear Head project.
"Elmer is personally incorruptible," Mr. Murray said. "Have no doubt about that. He’s drawn like a moth to a flame to a lot of things, things he was promoting. Elmer was never in it for what he could get out of it. He was doing it because he thought it would be a good thing to do for Cape Breton."
( smaher@herald.ca)


Under the conservative government of Canada war profiteering has increased ten fold. Canada is now on the top list of military industrial contractors. Our current defense Minister Mr. MacKay had a campaign debt of 500k, (by his own admission at the end of 2004 which precluded him from running for the leadership). He did however run for office and his debt disappeared. He has yet to reveal to the public where the money came from to dispose of that debt.

BTW if you plan on dating Peter MacKay,look how he treated his last "love:"


'Schoolyard bully' quip sparks furor in House
JEFF SALLOT
From Friday's Globe and Mail
October 20, 2006 at 8:01 AM EST
OTTAWA — Opposition Liberals have demanded an apology from Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay for apparently referring to his former romantic partner, Liberal MP Belinda Stronach, as a dog during a nasty Question Period in the House of Commons yesterday.
...

Who paid Peter 500K? We only wanta know who paid the Defense Minister of Canada's
campaign debt(s)?

Justice Obstructed

CBC just announced that the court has agreed to stay the deportation of Karlheinz Schreiber until it can be heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. Can anyone explain why we are deporting a Canadian to Germany and our Prime Minister is making comments ala Bush, to the effect that we are returning him to his home country?

Isn't the interference of Harper's justice department to attempt to deport Schreiber PRIOR to an inquiry an obstruction of justice?


From the Toronto Star
Saturday, November 17, 2007

Harper Wants Schreiber Out Of Canada..I Wonder Why?

PM HINTS THAT HE WILL NOT LET SCHREIBER STAY UNTIL MULRONEY INQUIRY IS OVER

We've already spent millions keeping this guy here so what is the big rush?
Stephen Harpers' CONservative government hinted Friday that it wants to send Karlheinz Schreiber back to Germany and have officials from a public inquiry interview him there – even though Mr. Schreiber says he won't talk if that happens.
They say they want him out of the coutry as they have spent too much on him already.
So what will it cost to fly the inquiry over to Schreiber in Germany?
And are they just wanting him gone to mimize the impact on their polling numbers?
Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, now acting as the government's chief spokesman on the issue in the Commons, refused to say what the government will do, but added that the inquiry will be able to question witnesses “wherever they might be.”
http://jimbenderoxford.blogspot.com/2007/11/harper-wants-schreiber-out-of-canadai.html


back to Stealth:

Mr. Schreiber has been out on bail for EIGHT years. Two weeks ago Harper's thugs picked him up, forced him to wear an orange jumpsuit, cuffed him, put him in leg irons and dragged him off to jail. When he arrived at the ethics committee yesterday he looked like any of us over sixty would who had been dragged from their homes. If Mr. Schreiber is Canadian and Harper is treating him this way - he will do the same to you or me. How are they treating him in jail? Isn't this harrassment of a critical witness against the government. Good grief...obstuction of justice could not get much more blatent.



Stephen Harper stood in parliament and pilloried his like counterpart, Paul Martin for months.
Now we see the cesspool of lies, bribes and sleaze that really is the Harper legacy.
This man would not know character if his life depended on it. His "shining light" is the right wing religious right of the USA, while is mentor is Brian Mulroney, the guy who stole the furniture from Sussex Drive...wow. Such talent for choosing integrity and character. I think if Stephen Harper chooses anyone for any position we need to look that person over very well.
Peter MacKay for example had a 500K campaign debt (that he refers to as a "personal debt") that suddenly disappeared and Mr. MacKay is not willing to let us know where the money came from....nor is Mr. Harper.


And as for your francophone smears against Mr. Dion, Harper,
...Dion looks an awful lot like in Roberto Remigio Benigni in Life is Beautiful. While the Canadian Neo Cons goose step around him slamming his English, he is quietly, exposing them for the world to see. Unfortunately he has some in his own party who have been at the corporate trough for too long, but do not under estimate Dion, once he fends off the North American Union corporatists from within, he will be just fine. He has something we have not seen in decades - integrity.








Who paid Peter MacKay 500K.....hhhmmm?

Mr. Cavalier, groomed by Thyssen Industries in Germany (who along with the Bush family funded Hitler), he now is Defense Minister of Canada. He told the CBC in 2004 that he could not run for the leadership because he still owed 500K from his last leadership campaign and could not afford to run.
His debt disappeared and he now refers to his former campaign debt as a "personal debt."

Mr. Harper has assured us that he has reviewed the details of that transaction and there is no conflict of interest. Great - then there should be no problem showing the public - it would be the right thing to do.

We Know Who Paid Brian. Who Paid Peter?

The Halifax Herald Limited ,

Thursday, May 13, 2004
MacKay's financial secret safe with Harper
No conflict, party leader says
by Stephen Maher


OTTAWA - Stephen Harper says he knows who paid off Peter MacKay's debt from the Progressive Conservative leadership campaign and he doesn't believe Mr. MacKay is in a conflict of interest.
"I have spoken to Peter MacKay about this," the federal Conservative leader said Wednesday. "He's told me. Peter and I have discussed it on a couple of occasions. The debts that he's told me about were never nearly as high as some of the things that have been reported. And he's also told me how those were resolved."
Mr. MacKay, the Tory MP for Pictou-Antigonish-Guysborough, told this newspaper's editorial board in December that he had decided not to run for the leadership of the new, merged Conservative party, partly because he had personal debts of nearly $500,000 left over from his successful bid for the leadership of the old PC party last May.
Mr. MacKay said last week in Ottawa that family and friends helped him pay off the debt but that it was never as big as had been reported. But he wouldn't reveal who gave him money, or how much.
Mr. Harper said he believes everything is above-board.




(Given Mr. Harper sat on a letter from Karlheinz Schreiber discussing the Mulroney payment, for six months, it is no surprise that this Peter MacKay story goes back to 2003) The cavalier manner in which Mr Harper assures us everything is above board after spending so many months harping on Liberal corruption that his pious pontification has become irritating even to followers.

Given the current situation with Schreiber, perhaps the ethics committee could ask Mr. Schreiber the simple question:


"Have you ever paid any funds to Mr. Peter MacKay, a shell company, or a representative of, or a bank account of the current Defense Minister of Canada"

Given the direct links that the MacKay family has to Thyssen Industries, along with Mr. Schreiber, it behooves us to know what our elected politicians are doing and how they get sums ot this size and in return for what.


...

back to the article,



"I'm satisfied with his explanations," he said. "I've said to Peter and other members of caucus, when we form a government and people ask to sit in cabinet, there will be appropriate checks on people to ensure they don't have any conflict of interest problems. But certainly the information I have wouldn't suggest that."
Democracy Watch, a group that pushes for greater openness in politics, said last week that Mr. MacKay should reveal who gave him the money.
"He will have no leg to stand on, if he is an MP after the election, to criticize the Liberals for hiding anything," said Duff Conacher, the group's co-ordinator.
"The public has a right to know what goes in and out of MPs' bank accounts in terms of gifts and donations."






During question period on Tuesday, Treasury Board president Reg Alcock took Mr. MacKay to task for keeping the names of the donors secret.


"I would ask the member why is he so afraid to share with Canadians who financed his leadership campaign?" Mr. Alcock said when Mr. MacKay asked a question about the sponsorship scandal.


In Ottawa on Wednesday, Mr. MacKay said he followed all the rules.


"I've complied with all the reporting regulations," he said. "It was on our website. I followed the instructions of my chief financial officer. If people want to look at my tax receipts and my personal bank account, I don't think that's a reasonable request."
Reasonable or not, Mr. MacKay would be required to reveal all such gifts and donations if MPs vote to adopt the draft of a new ethics code requiring all MPs to disclose any gifts.
NDP MP Alexa McDonough said Mr. MacKay is being hypocritical.

Under the new legislation, what he's doing would be completely illegal," she said Wednesday. "So I guess his ethical standard is: Do what you can get away with for as long as you can get away with it, and in the end, if the law requires it, just be glad you got away with it before you had to divulge the information."
People should not accept this kind of secrecy from an MP, she said.


"I just can't conceive of how he could think the public would be accepting of the explanation that it was only a few family and friends that paid off $500,000, and by the way, it wasn't that much after all, even though I told the public it was, and in the end it's nobody's damn business."


Mr. MacKay insisted his personal finances are private. (What is personal about paying off a campaign debt?)


"It was personal debt," he said. "Do you want my mortgage? Do you want to see a property assessment? With $250 million of taxpayers' money missing, this is obviously a partisan exercise that somebody is driving, and that's all I'm willing to say about it."
Some of Mr. MacKay's former Progressive Conservative colleagues are suspicious about the donations.



Mr. MacKay won the PC leadership race after signing a deal with leadership rival David Orchard promising to keep the party from merging with the Canadian Alliance. Mr. MacKay later broke that deal and negotiated a merger of the two parties.
Mr. Orchard said the party is still holding on to $70,000 in donations he raised during his leadership campaign.
"It just appears that someone has looked after Mr. MacKay, and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada no longer exists," he said.
Sinclair Stevens, who is leading a court battle against the PC-Alliance merger, supported Mr. MacKay's leadership bid after Scott Brison dropped out.
Mr. Stevens said large cash donations can influence a politician.
"I would think that he was essentially backed by the money element in our party, the Bay Street people," he said Wednesday.

...

Mr. MacKay bridles at any suggestion of conflict of interest.
"Am I under some obligation to family members and friends, and what is it exactly that I'm going to do for them when I'm an opposition member?" he said.
"This suggestion from Duff Conacher that I will somehow be beholden to somebody because they helped me out with personal debt ... I thought that we wanted to encourage people to run."



(complete text at: http://www.davidorchard.com/online/media-2004/financialsecret-halifaxchronicleherald-maher-20040513.html)



Indeed, who paid Peter? Mr. Harper's word that the money was all above board lacks a certain credibilty given who he has chosen as a mentor, the man who stole the furniture from the residence of Prime Minister, taking tacky to a whole new level.

Following the Money to Mulroney

FOLLOWING THE MONEY: THE WINDING ROAD TO BRITAN (code name for Brian)

The following two examples show how money went from both Airbus Industrie and Thyssen Industries into a coded account called "FRANKFURT". Bank documents show that in 1993 the BRITAN account received $500,000 Canadian from the FRANKFURT account.There were four different cash withdrawls out of the BRITAN account in 1993 and 1994 totaling $300,000. In his interview with CBC, Karlheinz Schreiber confirmed what the bank records and daytimers suggest: That the cash that he gave to Mulroney came out of this account.


Example 1 : Thyssen Industries (interesting the same firm involved in funding Adolf Hitler with the Bush family)
October 4, 1988: I.A.L. writes invoice to Thyssen Industries to request the transfer of $2 million Canadian


October 25, 1988: Thyssen Industries deposits $2 million into I.A.L. account #235.972.029See document

October 28, 1988: I.A.L. in Vaduz, Liechtenstein transfers $2 million Canadian to its parent company in Liechtenstein, Kensington, Anstalt.See document


October 28, 1988: I.A.L's parent company Kensington Anstalt is debited a total of $1.5 million dollars.See document

October 27, 1988: Kensington transfers $1 million to Karlheinz Schreiber's Zurich account 18679 IAL. Transfer officially arrives November 1, 1988.





As a point of interest did you know that Peter MacKay, Defense Minister, worked for Thyssen in Germany for a period of time?

Schreiber says Elmer MacKay urged him to mend fences with Mulroney

Last Updated: Wednesday, November 28, 2007 11:10 PM ET
CBC News

Karlheinz Schreiber says former Conservative cabinet minister Elmer MacKay (father of the current Defense Minister, Peter MacKay) urged him to write a letter to Brian Mulroney to patch up their relationship so he could raise his extradition case with the prime minister, CBC News has learned....

Schreiber said he sent the letter because MacKay suggested Mulroney might raise the issue of Schreiber's pending extradition with Harper.
But Harper has said Mulroney never raised the issue of Schreiber's extradition with him at that meeting.
When approached at his Lorne, N.S., home, MacKay would not comment to CBC News about the e-mail.

November 1, 1988: Schreiber's 18679.1 Canadian dollars account receives $1 million.See document

November 2, 1988 , 1988: FRANKFURT rubrik receives $500,000 Canadian from 18679.1See document

July 26, 1993: FRANKFURT rubrik account transfers $500,000 Canadian to BRITAN account.

July 26, 1993: BRITAN rubrik receives $500,000 in Canadian funds.See document

July 27, 1993: First cash withdrawal out of BRITAN account of $100,000.
November 11, 1993: Second cash withdrawal out of BRITAN account of $100,00.


Ex. AIRBUS

October 5, 1988: Banque Francaise (Airbus bank in Paris) deposits $5 million U.S. into International Aircraft Leasing Account 235.972.037 See document

October 5, 1988: I.A.L. tranfers $4.5 million U.S. to parent company Kensington Anstalt,
account number 235.971.021 See document

October 5, 1988: Kensington writes cheque for $4.5 million U.S. to be deposited into Swiss Bank Corporation in Zurich(Schweizerscher Bankverein)See document

October 6, 1988: Karlheinz Schreibers' Zurich account 18679.4 USD 'IAL' receives $4.5 million (minus $5.06) See document

October 20, 1988: Schreiber's 18679.4 sees transfer to unnamed places of $550,000 USD See document

FIVE YEARS LATER

July 26, 1993: $500,000 is withdrawn from FRANKFURT account the day the BRITAN account receives $500,000. See document

Extensive video, photographs and documentation may be found at:
http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/moneytruthandspin/money.html

Hopefully Schreiber will blow the cover of EVERY crook in government regardless of party and we will be left with the people who will help lead our country out of this guagmire of
increasingly totalitarian corporate toadies stealing our government. We should not merge church, state OR business. When they merge the result is as evil as the CEO's behind the money changers of this international money laundry. Let us (the people) hear everything
Mr. Schreiber has to say, he is elderly,he doesn't have long left on the planet and it would
behoove us to listen, he has little to lose and we have much to learn.

Finally how can Canada deport a Canadian? Schreiber is a naturalized Canadian and yet we are treating him as a German being returned to his country of origin? Are we becoming the USA, where war criminals are given better treatment than those representing truth or justice?

So Mr. Schreiber...we are ALL ears. Hopefully this group will treat you with decorum because you do appear to warm up and start talking if the person speaking to you is pleasant and conversational.

Musing With Molly

At this time of year it is always nice to reflect with someone who has a good sense of humour, and no one had a better one than Molly Ivins. She had to, she covered the Texas legislature and where many fell into abject states of depression over the overt graft, greed, and guile of the occupants therein, Molly loved it. Thus it is she I walk with when the weight of the world is too much with me.

I was thinking about the Savings and Loan rip off under the H.W. (Bush), and how shortly after Dubya's cornation was complete, the Enron debacle downed a goodly chunk of the market and succeeded in devastating the 401K's of thousands of employees. Of course ol Dubya flew around in Enron's corporate jet campaigning but there was nary a mention of that licence to larceny. (Law as we know it only applies to those not Bush, or Cheney)



So I wanted to see what Molly had to say about it:

Laying It Out
June 1st, 2006

by Molly Ivins

A Houston jury convicted both Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling, despite the fact that Kenny Boy packed his Bible to the courtroom every day. Since it is a long and noble Texas tradition for the accused to fight all allegations by finding Jesus, this indicates a major degree of guilt. (While on trial for murder, T. Cullen Davis, the Fort Worth millionaire, not only found Jesus but also threw a big party to celebrate at the mansion, with piles of shrimp and BBQ and a soundtrack that announced over and over throughout the grounds that night, “The son of Stinky Davis has found the son of God.”)


...
Meanwhile, Houston reacted as though the Rockets had won the NBA championship.
Many a thoughtful analyst has given us to understand that Lay and Skilling are guilty of arrogance and hubris. Actually, they were convicted of fraud — massive, overwhelming and monstrous fraud. They also stole money and looted pension funds. They rigged energy markets and almost drove California (seventh-largest economy in the world) into bankruptcy.
And all along the way, this monstrous fraud was connected to government. Enron bought the politicians who bent the rules that let them steal, con and gyp. Lay and Skilling talked state after state into following the California model and deregulating electricity. Happy summer, everyone.


And then, of course, there was the thumbing-the-nose thievery, the offshore partnerships tricked out with the clever names so insiders would know how slick they were.
As the late Rep. Wright Patman Sr. observed: “Many of our wealthiest and most powerful citizens are very greedy. This fact has many times been demonstrated.”
The interesting thing about Lay and Skilling is they weren’t trying to evade the rules, they were rigging the rules in their favor. The fix was in — much of it law passed by former Sen. Phil Gramm of Texas, whose wife, Wendy, served on the board of Enron.







Where does that sense of entitlement come from?

What makes a Ken Lay think he can call the governor of Texas and ask him to soften up Gov. Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania on electricity deregulation? Not that being governor of Texas has ever been an office of much majesty, but a corporate robber wouldn’t think of doing that if it were Brian Schweitzer of Montana or Bill Richardson of New Mexico.
The extent to which not just state legislatures but the Congress of the United States are now run by large corporate special interests is beyond mere recognition as fact. The takeover is complete. Newt Gingrich and Tom DeLay put in place a system in which it’s not a question of letting the head of the camel into the tent — the camels run the place.
It has all happened quite quickly — in less than 20 years. Laws were changed and regulations repealed until an Enron can set sail without responsibility, supervision or accountability. The business pages are fond of trumpeting the merits of “transparency” and “accountability,” but you will notice whenever there is a chance to roll back any of New Deal regs, the corporations go for broke trying to get rid of them entirely.
I’m not attempting to make this a partisan deal — only 73 percent of Enron’s political donations went to Republicans. But I’ll be damned if Enron’s No. 1 show pony politician, George W. Bush, should be allowed to walk away from this. Ken Lay gave $139,500 to Bush over the years. He chipped in $100,000 to the Bush Cheney Inaugural Fund in 2000 and $10K to the Bush-Cheney Recount Fund.
Plus, Enron’s PAC gave Bush $113,800 for his ‘94 and ‘98 political races and another $312,500 from its executives. Bush got 14 free rides on Enron’s corporate jets during the 2000 campaign, including at least two during the recount. Until January 2004, Enron was Bush’s top contributor.
And what did it get for its money? Ken Lay was on Bush’s short list to be energy secretary. He not only almost certainly served on Cheney’s energy task force, there is every indication that the task force’s energy plan, the one we have been on for five years, is in fact the Enron plan. Lay used Bush as an errand boy, calling the governor of Texas and having him phone Tom Ridge of Pennsylvania to vouch for what swell energy deregulation bills Enron was sponsoring in states all over the country.
It seems to me we all understand this is a systemic problem.
We need to reform the political system, or we’ll lose the democracy. I don’t think it’s that hard. It doesn’t take rocket science. We’ve done it before successfully at the presidential level and tried it several places at the state level. Public campaign financing isn’t perfect and can doubtlessly be improved upon as we go. Let us begin.
...
First we hold them accountable.

Chevron's Pipeline Supports Burmese Militia

Chevron's Pipeline Is the Burmese Regime's Lifeline
By Amy Goodman, King Features Syndicate. Posted October 3, 2007.

(Condi Rice sat on the board of Chevron during the biggest bloodbath in Burmese history, as the militia cleared people off their land and handed it to Chevron, forcing locals into slave labor. )

The barbarous military regime depends on revenue from the nation’s gas reserves and partners such as Chevron, a detail ignored by the Bush administration.

Tools EMAIL
Also by Amy Goodman
Disgraced General Who Pushed for Torture in Iraq Is Now a Spokesman for Democrats?

Ricardo Sanchez was the Iraq commander during the Abu Ghraib atrocities, and last week he gave the Dems' weekly radio address. Amy Goodman revisits how the torture policy began.Nov 27, 2007

What Would Jesus Buy?As the holiday shopping frenzy begins, one documentary explores the problems of mass consumerism and the exploited foreign labor it depends on.Nov 21, 2007

How the Neocon-Christian Right Alliance Brought Down the House of Bush

Craig Unger shares the untold story of how a band of true believers seized the executive branch, started the Iraq war, and still imperils America’s future.Nov 21, 2007
More stories by Amy Goodman
Amy Goodman RSS Feed
Main AlterNet RSS Feed

The image was stunning: tens of thousands of saffron-robed Buddhist monks marching through the streets of Rangoon [also known as Yangon], protesting the military dictatorship of Burma. The monks marched in front of the home of Nobel Peace Prize winner Aung San Suu Kyi, who was seen weeping and praying quietly as they passed. She hadn't been seen for years. The democratically elected leader of Burma, Suu Kyi has been under house arrest since 2003. She is considered the Nelson Mandela of Burma, the Southeast Asian nation renamed Myanmar by the regime.



After almost two weeks of protest, the monks have disappeared. The monasteries have been emptied. One report says thousands of monks are imprisoned in the north of the country.
No one believes that this is the end of the protests, dubbed "The Saffron Revolution." Nor do they believe the official body count of 10 dead. The trickle of video, photos and oral accounts of the violence that leaked out on Burma's cellular phone and Internet lines has been largely stifled by government censorship. Still, gruesome images of murdered monks and other activists and accounts of executions make it out to the global public. At the time of this writing, several unconfirmed accounts of prisoners being burned alive have been posted to Burma-solidarity Web sites.

The Bush administration is making headlines with its strong language against the Burmese regime. President Bush declared increased sanctions in his U.N. General Assembly speech. First lady Laura Bush has come out with perhaps the strongest statements. Explaining that she has a cousin who is a Burma activist, Laura Bush said, "The deplorable acts of violence being perpetrated against Buddhist monks and peaceful demonstrators shame the military regime."
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, at the meeting of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, said, "The United States is determined to keep an international focus on the travesty that is taking place." Keeping an international focus is essential, but should not distract from one of the most powerful supporters of the junta, one that is much closer to home. Rice knows it well: Chevron.



Fueling the military junta that has ruled for decades are Burma's natural gas reserves, controlled by the Burmese regime in partnership with the U.S. multinational oil giant Chevron, the French oil company Total and a Thai oil firm. Offshore natural gas facilities deliver their extracted gas to Thailand through Burma's Yadana pipeline. The pipeline was built with slave labor, forced into servitude by the Burmese military.
The original pipeline partner, Unocal, was sued by EarthRights International for the use of slave labor. As soon as the suit was settled out of court, Chevron bought Unocal.


...

Chevron's role in propping up the brutal regime in Burma is clear. According to Marco Simons, U.S. legal director at EarthRights International:

"Sanctions haven't worked because gas is the lifeline of the regime. Before Yadana went online, Burma's regime was facing severe shortages of currency. It's really Yadana and gas projects that kept the military regime afloat to buy arms and ammunition and pay its soldiers."

The U.S. government has had sanctions in place against Burma since 1997. A loophole exists, though, for companies grandfathered in. Unocal's exemption from the Burma sanctions has been passed on to its new owner, Chevron.
Rice served on the Chevron board of directors for a decade. She even had a Chevron oil tanker named after her. While she served on the board, Chevron was sued for involvement in the killing of nonviolent protesters in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. Like the Burmese, Nigerians suffer political repression and pollution where oil and gas are extracted and they live in dire poverty. The protests in Burma were actually triggered by a government-imposed increase in fuel prices.
Human-rights groups around the world have called for a global day of action on Saturday, Oct. 6, in solidarity with the people of Burma. Like the brave activists and citizen journalists sending news and photos out of the country, the organizers of the Oct. 6 protest are using the Internet to pull together what will probably be the largest demonstration ever in support of Burma. Among the demands are calls for companies to stop doing business with Burma's brutal regime.

and...from: http://www.badasf.org/

Outraged? Let's not forget Burma, but help keep the Burma issue alive and well

Join Dec. 9th Burma Peace Rally in SF COME mark the the International Human Rights Day with a rally FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM in Burma Sunday Dec. 9th, 2:00 – 3:30 pmCivic Center PlazaPolk St & McAllister St, San Francisco, CA 94102 Wear Maroon red to honor Buddhist monks. The People of Burma have been forced to live under the brutal dictatorship since 1962, and have been violently crushed repeatedly every time they rose up against the successive dictatorial regimes.
Recently, led by Buddhist monks, hundreds of thousands of peaceful people are taking to the streets to cry out for an end to the long-standing military dictatorship in Burma yet again. However, holding Buddhist Sassana flags and reciting prayers of love on the street is now a crime punishable by beating and death. Many monks have been disrobed, beaten, humiliated, tortured, and killed, and there are reports of a massacre in the jungle. The military junta is raiding monasteries and private homes in the middle of the night and dragging away those they suspect of involvement. Over 4,000 Buddhist monks and protesters have been arrested and the Burmese population is living in fear. Flyer MS Word PDF More here
California, Call Call Call *NOW* and get your representatives to Co-Sponsor H.R. 3890: Block Burmese JADE Act of 2007 More here
...
No Fuel for Burmese JUNTA, Join AVAAZ's consumer boycott of Chevron and Total: We, the undersigned, pledge not to buy fuel from any gas station owned by Total Oil, Chevron, or any of their subsidiaries. The boycott will continue until the Burmese junta begins a genuine democratic transition and frees all political prisoners-- including Aung San Suu Kyi--or until the companies leave Burma entirely. More here

Burma: Targeted Sanctions Needed on Petroleum Industry (New York, November 19, 2007) � The United Nations Security Council should act to prohibit any new investment in Burma's oil and gas fields and block company payments that help sustain Burma's brutal military rule, Human Rights Watch said today. Human Rights Watch said that until the Security Council imposes sanctions, members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), China, India, the European Union, the United States and other countries that have economic ties to Burma should act to suspend any further development of Burma's oil and gas sector. To encourage an end to ongoing repression, Human Rights Watch also called for targeted financial sanctions on companies owned and controlled by the Burmese military or whose revenues substantially benefit the military. Read More
The USA is exposed before the world,oil companies, like ENRON, Chevron, and Unocal are clearly writing and driving US policy.

I think it is time we told these psychopathic, lawless, liars that we are holding them to account.
Is there any integrity left in America is the the question? Enough to save the jaundiced justice system from complete and utter demise?

War Criminals R US

War Criminals ‘R’ US
by Richard Curtis

Published on Monday, January 29, 2007
by CommonDreams.org

(double click on Abramoff money laundry chart right)


Many years ago during boot camp I learned a series of General Orders. And while these are difficult to recall (and oddly enough even to find) any longer, one of the things I recall learning was an obligation to follow all lawful orders. Part of what we learned had to do with the military having made changes in training following the War Crimes at My Lai. My clear impression was that the Navy intended us to know our obligations under the Hague Conventions of 1889 and 1907, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Nuremberg Conventions. These Conventions have legal standing as US law due to their having been ratified by our Senate.
These days the most one hears about such things tends to involve the case of Lt. Ehren Watada, and his refusal to follow orders to deploy to Iraq. Watada’s claim is that as the Iraq War was instigated on false pretexts it is clearly a violation of the above Conventions and in particular a Crime Against Peace. The Army’s position is that Watada refused orders and that this behavior is criminal under the Army’s legal system. The judge hearing the case refuses to allow the defense to even use Watada’s reasons for refusing these illegal orders to be considered.
...
Why would a military judge refuse to allow an officer to make the case that in refusing an order the officer was following a higher law, which is itself recognized by the military?
This seems to be obviously irrational. A judge should be bound by the law, including important provisions of international law that have been incorporated into domestic law. For a judge to refuse to follow the law is beyond reason.
But there is a reason. Watada’s challenge is that the Iraq War is illegal. This fact seems beyond question. A legal war cannot logically be premised on lies, and we all know the Iraq War was premised on a series of well coordinated lies (the “Downing Street Memo” being the proof any rational person needs). The judge cannot allow Watada to argue the War is illegal because it is obviously illegal, and as such constitutes a War Crime, so the judge disregards the law – much to the shame of us all.
If the war is acknowledged as illegal that means admitting that everyone who participates in it, plans it, or orders it is a war criminal


As a society, our morality is incredibly shallow, and we have a difficult time dealing with challenges such as these. Watada is obviously right and those who prosecute him can only succeed if they can put the law aside in making their charges stick.
We don’t like to think that a young Marine drafted into the military via the Poverty Draft and then sent off to war in Iraq is a War Criminal – but he is. They all are. This is the obvious moral truth that follows from Watada’s challenge.
This is what the Nuremburg Conventions demand. One cannot be excused from illegal acts simply because one was ordered to commit those acts. We are all moral beings, even in the military, and as such have a legal and moral obligation to refuse to participate in War Crimes. And yet tens of thousands of military personal, not to mention the entire military command up to the president, are by definition War Criminals.
This is why Watada is not allowed to make a reasonable defense. This is why our politicians and media refuse to discuss the details of his case. This is why most Americans know nothing of international law. The law is clear. The history and origins of the war are clear. It is a crime. And those who prosecute this war are criminals.



These are just the facts of the case. The real question is will the American people tolerate being lead by War Criminals? Will the American people decide that the law and morality matter? Or will we continue to pretend that if someone in a position of power says that it is so that it is so? Nuremburg demands of us that we think morally and think for ourselves. Nuremburg stands in the shadows condemning our leaders and our military.




Watada properly and legally refused an illegal order and we must now admit the truth of his position and recognize that we as a society stand condemned in the light of this truth. Morality is not easy, and thinking for oneself in a time of wars and lies is even harder. There are times when we are tested. This is one of those times.
Are we any better than those Germans who just followed orders?

Richard Curtis, PhD is a recent graduate of the School of Religion at Claremont Graduate University and presently an adjunct professor of philosophy at Shoreline Community College in Seattle, WA.

http://www.commondreams.org/views07/0129-26.htm

If ever there was a time for the people to read the Declaration of Independence and rise to demand the law be enforced against this pack of evil who dare call themselves "elite," it is NOW. Is there no disgust at the immorality of this group, the hypocritical pious bullshit that flows from these liars while they bilk the national treasury and rape foreign countries on behalf of private industry.

Indeed we are the war criminals and our silence will not protect us.

Until we hold these cretins to account, America is no longer the home of the free and the land of the brave it has quite simply become another goose-stepping, order following Hitlerian gang of thugs and dead enders, torturing, raping, stealing and lying all over the world, in the name of
GOD. The fact is that every few years rich white men in oil companies sit down and decide who to rape and pillage next in the name of Jesus, or Mohammed, or anyone else who allows us to project our own misery somewhere else and have them deal with it. If the takeover is not going well and it seldom does, they start a civil war by stirring up local hostilities and bombing various factions. (See the School of Americas..they have been at it for sixty years...it could be a good time to learn about it.) Burma must be an absolute role model for them, a role model in the absolute tyranny that American, AND French oil companies have injected into that poor nation in the name of the almighty buck.

Nope the world has been shocked, but hardly awed, mostly disgusted, dismayed and aware that Nazi Germany was not defeated in the last war, they simply moved to the USA and with Dubya, stepped into plain sight.

War Criminals Find Sanctuary in the USA

U.S. Haven for War Criminals: (not counting Bush/Cheney)
by markthshark
Sat Nov 17, 2007 at 05:00:50 PM PST

"America has become a haven for the world's war criminals because it lacks the laws needed to prosecute them." – Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) – November 14, 2007

Unbeknownst to most Americans, more than 1,000 people from 85 different countries accused of such crimes as mass rape, killings, torture and genocide, now reside inside the United States, according to figures from the Department of Homeland Security.




The Washington Times is a major contributor on CNN. The Times is owned by the Rev Moon and is notorious for its racist, sexist right wing agenda.

Moon contributes heavily to the RNC.








Senator Durbin continued, saying torture was the only serious human-rights violation that constituted a crime under American law when committed outside the United States by a non-American national.

"This is unacceptable. Our laws must change and our determination to end this shameful situation must become a priority," Durbin, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, said at a hearing of the subcommittee Wednesday.
He's trying to get more information about specific cases.


Juan Romagoza Arce, is the director of a clinic providing free care for poor people in Washington D.C. Back in 1980, the El Salvadoran military seized the young doctor as he cared for the poor in his native country’s civil war. He was tortured for 22 days. Reportedly, an estimated 75,000 people died in the 12 year war.
During his testimony before Durbin’s committee, Romagoza told lawmakers that he was given electric shocks until he lost consciousness then kicked and burned with cigarettes until he came to. He also told of being sodomized, nearly asphyxiated in a hood containing calcium oxide -- a chemical that can cause severe shortness of breath when inhaled. Romagoza also said he was subjected to waterboarding, including being hung by his feet with his head immersed in water until nearly drowned.
The disturbing story appeared in Wednesday’s McClatchy’s Washington Bureau:...



Romagoza and two other torture victims brought a civil suit in U.S. federal court in West Palm Beach, Fla., against two Salvadoran generals who moved to Florida in 1989: Jose Guillermo Garcia, who was the minister of defense, and Carlos Eugenio Vides Casanova, who was the director general of the Salvadoran National Guard.
In 2002, a jury found them liable for the torture of the three, and a judgment of $54.6 million was entered against them and upheld on appeal.
Romagoza said he didn't expect to see any of the money.
He testified that he'd received many threatening phone calls and letters at the time of the trial but that he'd overcome his fears and testified.
"I felt like I was in the prow of a boat and that there were many people rowing behind that were moving me into this moment," he told Durbin's panel.

"I felt that if I looked back at them I'd weep, because I'd see them again, wounded, tortured, raped, naked, torn and bleeding. So I didn't look back, but I felt their support, their strength and their energy."

The Merchants of Death Inc.

Sam Stein
The Huffington Post

War Contracts To Controversial Companies On The Rise
November 19, 2007 07:00 PM

Read More: Blackwater, Dyncorp, Haliburton, Iraq War Contracts, Iraq War. Contracts On The Rise, Kbr, Breaking Politics News
Politics
Email
Print
The U.S. government awarded more than $16 billion in federal contracts to the former Halliburton subsidiary KBR between 2004 and 2006, despite controversial charging practices and allegations of overcharging in Iraq, according to a new report released Monday.
According to the Center For Public Integrity, the investigative journalism group, KBR's contracts amounted to more than nine times the total given to the second largest contractor, DynCorp International, the private security firm that has been recently implicated in the shooting of an Iraqi civilian. (AND the sex slave trade!)

Another private contracting firm accused of killing innocent Iraqi civilians, Blackwater USA, was 12th on the list of companies and joint ventures, with $485 million in contracts.

"These problems do not seem to have any reflection on the total or renewal of contracts. The money keeps going up as if these problems did not exist," the center's Executive Director Bill Buzenberg, told the Huffington Post.

"With these contracts it is more money, more complexity and less oversight."



In all, U.S. expenditures in Iraq far exceeded those in Afghanistan, by a factor of more than seven. The money, regardless of the region, is massive. U.S. government contracts have grown more than 50 percent annually, from $11 billion in 2004 to almost $17 billion in 2005 and more than $25 billion in 2006.
The report, which follows a previous project in 2003, revealed that, over a three year period, more than $20 billion in war contracts went to foreign companies whose identities were impossible to determine. These contracts, along with the $20 billion awarded to the "unidentified" companies, accounted for about 45 percent of all funds awarded to the top 100 contractors.





"You want to fight a war, but not know where the money is going and not keep track of it?" said Buzenberg. "Someday there will be a real accounting of what has happened and what this government has done."
Editors Note: An earlier version of this article stated that KBR received $16 million in contracts. The total, not surprisingly, should have been $!6 billion. Thanks to multiple readers for pointing that out.


While private contractors, identified or not, prowl the world committing terror at will in the name of the United States of America. If you have any natural resources at all..watch out... they are...






the congress gave them a pass a l-ong time ago.


Heck Rumsfeld had to run and hide in France recently, he is running out of countries. He is wanted in Germany and the Bush family has had a suit filed in Germany as well - holocaust survivors from Auschwitz would like some retribution from the funders of Hitler and those who profited on their agony.


As long as the United States and the news media keep tip toeing around these Nazis and insisting the world act as if these are decent people who are accredited to be in their positions this nightmare will continue. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rove, Rice, Powell, and the lot of them should be under arrest for obstruction of justice, treason, propaganda leading to an illegal, immoral war, misuse of the military.

My ninety year old grandmother just threw a chair at the TV when Blitzer suggested "the surge is a success." For whom Wolf, for whom?