Elite Controllers & Hidden Agendas

           Who is George W. Bush?

          So Bush Did Steal the White House

      Who is George W. Bush?

PARDONGATE AND BUSHFRAUD

George W. Bush and Jesus Christ  What Would Jesus Say About the Death Penalty?

Bush Seen Abroad A Complete Fraud

SPORTS STADIUM SUBSIDIES: THE GREAT AMERICAN SCAM

Shrub Flubs His Dub

IT'S NEVER BEEN EASIER TO 'FOLLOW THE MONEY'  Bush Donors Cash In

Crap. The Sequel: The Crap Ends Here by Michael Moore Filmmaker ( "Roger & Me," "The Big One")

It's time to demand a Senate investigation into Dubya's "Harkengate"  By James Hatfield

Firm's Iraq Deals Greater Than Cheney Has Said - Affiliates Had $73 Million in Contracts

Beast of the Month - June 2001   Antonin Scalia, "Gang of Five" Supreme Court Mastermind

George Bush an Asshole? Japan's Foreign Minister Tanaka Makes Inappropriate
Private Remark About Bush

Bugliosi and Dershowitz on Good Morning America 7/9/01

Cocaine, Columbia, WTC, Mossad and the Bush Family Links Page

War and the Media Greatness of George W. Bush

 

Who is George W. Bush

BY SUSAN BRYCE

He grew up as a very rich child with powerful parents. He partied from high school until he was 40 then went cold turkey on drugs and alcohol. His business career was marked by mediocrity or failure that nonetheless resulted making him millions of dollars thanks to the political allies of his father, who happened to be the US President. He was elected 46th governor of Texas mostly because of his family name and his dad’s cronies. He found God and became a Christian. Now, George W. Bush is the 43rd president of the United States.

The Bush administration is a combination of Cold War warriors, big business bureaucrats and ideologues, harvested from the Ford, Nixon and Reagan governments. As veterans of past Republican administrations their thinking reflects a bygone era, particularly with respect to social policy, the environment and nuclear defence. Many of Bush’s appointees are pals from his days as Governor of Texas, or are members of influential insider think tanks such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Centre for Strategic and International Studies. This article provides a brief analysis of the key players in the ‘Bush team’, their backgrounds, their policies and their likely agendas over the next four years.

             President George Walker Bush

Bush’s name is a familiar one in the ranks of America’s top leadership: George W. Bush is the oldest son of George Herbert Walker Bush, the 41st president. The only other set of father-son presidents came early in US history when John Quincy Adams, son of the second president, John Adams, became the sixth president in 1825. Bush Jr. attended Eastern elitist schools, in this case Andover Prep, and Yale. According to a Newsweek profile, he “went to Yale but seems to have majored in drinking at the Deke House.” He became a member of the secretive Skull & Bones society in 1968.

George W. Bush joins a recent parade of state governors (Carter, Reagan, and Clinton) who have moved up to the highest office in the country. Bush was elected Governor of Texas in 1994. He and his brother Jeb Bush (elected in Florida in 1998) were the first brothers to be simultaneous governors since the Rockefellers. Before becoming Governor of Texas, George Bush was involved in the Texan oil scene, where he founded an oil company, Arbusto Energy, Inc. (Arbusto is the Spanish word for bush.) The company floundered in the early 1980s when oil prices dropped. Fifty investors, who were mainly family friends, sunk millions to help bail the company out. Nearing collapse, Arbusto was purchased by Spectrum 7 Energy Corporation in September 1984. Despite a poor track record, the owners made Bush Jr. the president and gave him 13.6% of the parent company’s stock.

The Spectrum 7 oil firm company was owned by two staunch Reagan/Bush (dad was then vice president) supporters, who were also involved with the Texas Rangers. After working on his father’s successful 1988 presidential campaign, Bush assembled a group of partners that purchased the Texas Rangers baseball franchise in 1989. He sold his stake for $14.9 million – while Texas governor. Not bad, considering his initial investment was $600,000 of borrowed money. Speaking after the sale, Bush told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram: “When it is all said and done, I will have made more money than I ever dreamed I would make.”

In 1986, the Harken Energy Corporation bought Spectrum 7’s 180-well operation. In 1990, Harken Energy was granted a contract to drill for oil off the coast of the Gulf state of Bahrain, shunting aside the oil giant Amoco, even though the company had no experience in offshore operations. Suggestions that the Bahrain government was attempting to curry favour with the US president, George Bush Snr, were denied.

A Harken Energy director was invited to participate in private White House briefings on Middle East policy, and in May 1990 Harken learned that Washington was considering an oil embargo of Iraq.

In June, Bush Jr. conveniently sold 212,000 of his Harken shares, raking in more than $848,500. In August, US intelligence agencies, in full propaganda mode, reported that Iraqi troops had invaded Kuwait and the value of Harken’s shares dropped 25%.

During the 2000 presidential election campaign, various allegations about Bush’s past misdemeanours surfaced. They include: an alleged conviction for drunk driving; an allegation that Bush halted investigation of a campaign contributor’s huge funeral home company; that he pulled strings to avoid Vietnam and got favourable treatment; and that he used drugs, then tried to cover it up.

During his campaign, President-elect Bush made a big point of travelling around the country and lecturing youngsters on staying celibate, sober and drug free. At one thank-you banquet for his campaign staff, Bush reportedly spoke to a lady, who by a brief comment she made, indicated she was a Christian. She was with her 16-year-old son. Bush asked the son if he was a believer, too. When the son answered that he didn’t think so, Bush asked “Do you mind if I tell you how I came to know Christ as my Savior?” Bush then pulled up a chair and witnessed to the boy for 30 minutes, even leading him in the sinner’s prayer.

And as governor of Texas, Bush attacked his predecessor for allowing leniency toward first-time drug users, and pushed a no tolerance policy that sent casual cocaine users to prison. During his campaign, he proclaimed that drug users “need to know that drug use has consequences.” In answer to questions about drug use, Bush says it doesn’t matter what he did “in his youth,” because the question is “have you grown up” and “have you learned from your mistakes.”

The 43rd president of the US is an unwavering proponent of trade liberalisation and a strong US military. Although he has pledged to curtail the use of US military power for purposes short of major wars, he is forging ahead with the US ballistic missile defence shield, following in the hawkish footsteps of his father. Shortly after his inauguration, George W. Bush told reporters: “We will work to defend our people and our allies against growing threats of missiles, information warfare, the threats of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. We will confront the new threats of a new century… we will begin creating the military of the future – one that takes full advantage of revolutionary new technologies. We will promote the peace by redefining the way wars will be fought.”

During his presidential campaign, Bush worked to silence his critics. Not since Richard Nixon has a major presidential candidate been so quick to prevent the free speech of his opponents. When asked about one critical web site, Bush told the press, “There ought to be limits to freedom. We’re aware of this site, and this guy is just a garbage man, that’s all he is.” His campaign reportedly bought up over 200 anti-Bush domain names including “bushsucks.com” and “bushbites.com” before the presidential election.

         Colin Powell: Secretary of State

After alleged cover-ups in Vietnam and in the Iran-Contra affair, Powell has once again managed to pull the prestige of the military rank above any scandal to become Secretary of State. After 35 years in the US Army, Powell took up the position of General and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs from 1989 to 1993. As a General, he rose to superhero status during the Gulf War. His famous quip about the Iraqi army, “We are going to cut it off, and then we are going to kill it,” impressed some of the fact starved journalists, who later described his Gulf War performance as “masterful.” For Powell, the armed forces are a gleaming and expensive elite, to be maintained at vast cost but not to be dirtied by any deployment, let alone peacekeeping. The “Powell Doctrine” focuses upon how to fight wars and when to fight them – with minimal casualties. Powell, a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, is believed to be one of the architects of the US military’s Joint Vision 2010 (previously reported in New Dawn No. 59).

Powell has come out of retirement to take up post as Secretary of State. During retirement, he wrote a best-selling autobiography and launched a career as a public speaker, addressing audiences across the United States and overseas. During his acceptance press conference, Powell lectured about his foreign policy priorities and made the case forcefully for a defensive shield to become “an essential part” of the nation’s security. Bush stood mutely along side, while Powell offered his vision for the future.

It is said that Powell does not advise, ‘he insists.’ His comments about Russia demonstrate the Bush administration’s commitment to a unipolar world: “Our relations with Russia must not be dictated by any fear on our part. For example, if we believe the enlargement of NATO should continue, for example, and we do believe that, we should not fear that Russia will object. We will do it because it is in our interest and because freedom-loving people wish to be part of NATO. Instead, we should deal with Russia’s objections and find a way to address them.”

Powell’s son, Michael, has been made Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission.

Condoleeza Rice: President Bush’s National Security Adviser

Rice served on the National Security Council under the previous Bush administration. From 1989-1991, she was a director and then senior director of Soviet and East European Affairs and was later named special assistant to the National Security Affairs Advisor.

Rice has written or collaborated on several books, including Germany Unified and Europe Transformed (1995), The Gorbachev Era (1986), and Uncertain Allegiance: The Soviet Union and the Czechoslovak Army (1984). Upon her arrival in Washington in 1986, she worked on nuclear strategic planning at the Joint Chiefs of Staff as part of a Council on Foreign Relations fellowship. Rice’s membership of the Council on Foreign Relations continues in the tradition of having a CFR member hold the NSA top spot (in recent years Henry Kissinger, Brent Scowcroft, and Zbigniew Brzezinski have held the post). In addition to her CFR membership, Dr. Rice is also a member of the Aspen Institute’s Strategy Group. She has served as a Professor and provost at Stanford University and as a fellow of the Hoover Institute.

Speaking about her appointment, Rice said: “George W. Bush will never allow America and our allies to be blackmailed. And make no mistake; blackmail is what the outlaw states seeking long-range ballistic missiles have in mind. It is time to move beyond the Cold War. It is time to have a president devoted to a new nuclear strategy and to the deployment of effective missile defenses at the earliest possible date.”

Donald Rumsfeld:
Secretary of Defense

Rumsfeld served as Secretary of Defense in the Ford administration (26 years ago). He recently chaired two high-profile study commissions on ballistic missile defense and the security of space-based infrastructure. The commissions concluded that “rogue” nations could threaten the United States with ballistic missiles sooner than analysts had predicted. The commission’s report is now one of the most influential documents in modern American military planning. It led the Clinton administration to propose its own limited version of a national missile defense system.

Rumsfeld is former Republican congressman, and is a former ambassador to NATO from 1973 to 1974. He completes a national security team (including the Vice President Dick Cheney and Secretary of State Powell) that shares the dream of continuing with President Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” program.

During the Reagan Administration, (which cut funding to education, health, income security and overseas aid programmes to make way for defence), Rumsfeld served as an adviser to the US Departments of State and Defense and as a member of the President’s General Advisory Committee on Arms Control.

Rumsfeld served as Chairman and chief executive officer at General Instrument Corporation, from 1990 to 1993. He was chief executive officer, president, and later chairman of G.D. Searle & Company, from 1977 to 1985.

Paul O’Neill:
Secretary of Treasury

Another Ford administration veteran, O’Neill worked in the Office of Management and Budget from 1967 to 1977, rising to deputy director. He was a multimillionaire shareholder and CEO from 1987 to 1998 and Chairperson of Alcoa Inc. from 1987 to 2001. Most recently, he was chairman of the RAND Corporation, the Los Angeles-based think tank and front for the CIA. He is also a fellow of the American Enterprise Institute. O’Neill built his business reputation at Alcoa by focusing on core business and engaging in ruthless cost cutting. From 1977 to 1978, O’Neill was involved with International Paper Company, eventually rising to president. Although O’Neill is a long time friend of Federal Reserve head Alan Greenspan, it is believed that he does not have sufficient knowledge to challenge Greenspan’s judgement if necessary. Other candidates for Secretary of Treasury were Walter V. Shipley, former chairman of Chase Manhattan Corporation; Donald B. Marron, chairman of the Paine Webber Group; and John M. Hennessy, former chairman of Credit Suisse First Boston. O’Neill, an old colleague of Dick Cheney’s, was apparently the pick of the crop.

Robert Zoellick:
United States Trade Representative

Zoellick worked on the US-Canada Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA) at the Treasury Department under President Reagan, and on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) at the State Department during the previous Bush administration. Zoellick is a past president of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, the influential think tank which sets the agenda for US government policy areas such as energy, the global information infrastructure, and trade relations.

In a gushy report about Zoellick, Australia’s national daily newspaper, The Australian, praised him as “an almost ludicrous over-achiever” and the “man many believe to be the brainiest, [and] intellectually the most formidable in the new administration of President George W. Bush.” The Australian named Zoellick as the likely successor to Colin Powell. Zoellick is a founding member of the Australian-American Leadership dialogue, and last year was granted a private audience with Prime Minister John Howard. Zoellick’s recent article in the CFR publication Foreign Affairs advocated a US free trade agreement linking Latin America and the Asia Pacific region.

Donald Evans:
Secretary of Commerce

Evans has been a life-long friend of George W. Bush and his appointment as Secretary of Commerce is seen as reward for his involvement in Bush’s election campaign. Evans worked for Tom Brown Inc., an independent energy company engaged in the domestic exploration, development, marketing and production of natural gas and crude oil, from 1975 to 2001, rising from an oil rig crew man to president, chairman and chief executive officer.

Norman Mineta:
Secretary, Department of Transportation

Mineta was senior vice president for transportation systems and services at Lockheed Martin Corporation from 1995 to 2000. He was a member of the US House of Representatives, from 1974 to 1995, and spent 20 years on the Transportation Committee, including two years as committee chairman. He was mayor of San Jose, California from 1971 to 1974 and a San Jose city councilman from 1967 to 1971.

Richard B. Cheney:
Vice President of the USA

The Vice President of the United States, known affectionately as “Dick”, is a career businessman and public servant. He has served three Presidents. His career in public service began in 1969 when he joined the Nixon Administration, serving in a number of positions at the Cost of Living Council, at the Office of Economic Opportunity, and within the White House. When Gerald Ford assumed the Presidency in August 1974, Cheney served on the transition team and later as Deputy Assistant to the President. In November 1975 he was named Assistant to the President and White House Chief of Staff, a position he held throughout the remainder of the Ford Administration.

As Secretary of Defense from March 1989 to January 1993, Cheney directed two of the largest military campaigns in recent history – Operation Just Cause in Panama and Operation Desert Storm in the Middle East.

After he left the Pentagon, Cheney became CEO of Halliburton in 1995. Halliburton is a Texas construction and engineering company that services oil companies and the US military.

He cashed in on his official contacts within the government, military, the oil industry and Middle East governments. Almost overnight, Halliburton, a middle-sized business, swelled its coffers to $15 billion in annual sales with contracts in 120 countries. Today Halliburton employs 100,000 people in 20 countries.

Although he flirted with the idea of running for president in 1996, Cheney opted instead to remain at Halliburton – where he become around $50 million richer – until he was selected as George W. Bush’s running mate.

John Ashcroft:
Attorney General

Ashcroft is a strong anti-abortion campaigner with a rigidly conservative and dogmatic outlook, who has expressed opposition to the National Endowment for the Arts. Ashcroft has earned the enmity of pro-choice women’s groups, conservation organisations, civil libertarians and Missouri’s black community. Ashcroft has been described as Bush’s gift to the right wing. Ashcroft, 58, was narrowly defeated for re-election as a Republican to the Senate in 2000. He is a staunch proponent of the death penalty.

Tommy Thompson:
Secretary, Health and Human Services

Thompson’s views on Medicaid, the public health insurance program for the poor and disabled, reflect his conservative thinking. He signed legislation that requires Wisconsin women seeking an abortion to first obtain counselling on alternatives, then wait three days for the procedure – if they still want it. He has been one of the main proponents of converting Medicaid to a system of block grants to states. The idea won Republican support in Congress in 1995 but ultimately failed, proving so contentious that it contributed to the shutdown of the federal government.

Thompson, who was elected governor of Wisconsin in 1986, succeeded in slashing the number of people in the state receiving welfare by 92%. Wisconsin under Thompson also set the pace in diverting public education funds to private and religious schools by way of vouchers.

Gale Norton:
Interior Secretary

Gale Norton is a protégé of James Watt, President Reagan’s controversial Interior secretary from 1981 to 1983. She also served in the Reagan administration in the Agriculture Department and then in the Interior Department where she helped advocate for the administration’s position on oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. As Colorado Attorney General, Norton was instrumental in creating the state’s “self audit” program, which gives businesses immunity from litigation and fines if they voluntarily report and correct violations of environmental laws.

Spencer Abraham:
Energy Secretary

Abraham was recently defeated as junior senator from Michigan, but during his brief career on Capitol Hill, he managed to introduce a bill to abolish the very department he has now been asked to run. He does not appear to have in depth knowledge about the need for an energy efficient economy. He fully supports Bush’s plans to open the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil exploration. Abraham served as deputy chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle from 1990 to 1992.

He was a founder of the right-wing Federalist Society. Its goal is to politically dominate the legal profession, especially at the level of the judiciary. It stands for eliminating welfare, halting affirmative action and discontinuing bilingual education. Its most prominent members are Supreme Court judges Scalia and Clarence Thomas, whose votes were crucial in delivering the ruling that put George Bush Jr. in the White House with a minority of popular votes.

Ann Veneman:
Secretary, Department of Agriculture

Veneman served as Secretary of California Department of Food and Agriculture from 1995 to 1999, rising to the position of deputy secretary. She has extensive experience in law and trade issues, including negotiations on the Uruguay Round that created the World Trade Organisation (WTO), on the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and on the US-Canada Free Trade Agreement.

Elaine Chao:
Secretary of Labor

Chao, the wife of Kentucky Republican Senator Mitch McConnell, is a former director of the Peace Corps and from 1996 to 2001 was a fellow at the conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation. Chao was president and chief executive officer of United Way of America from 1992-1996. She is a former vice-president of Bank of America Capital Markets Group.

Joe Allbaugh: Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency

Allbaugh, 48, previously served as chief of staff to then-Governor Bush (1995-1999) and as campaign manager for President Bush’s first gubernatorial campaign (1994). Before coming to Texas, he was the deputy secretary of transport for the State of Oklahoma.

George J. Tenet, Director, Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)

Bush asked George Tenet, the current director of central intelligence, “to stay on the job for what will amount to an undetermined period of time.” Tenet is the first CIA director in 28 years to remain in office after the White House switched occupants.

Tenet was sworn in as Director of Central Intelligence on July 11, 1997, following a unanimous vote by both the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the full Senate. In his position he heads the Intelligence Community (all foreign intelligence agencies of the United States) as well as directing the Central Intelligence Agency.

The First Lady Laura Welch Bush

A teacher librarian, her primary interest is education. When Bush was Governor of Texas, Laura Bush launched an early childhood development programme that was a collaborative effort with the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy.

President George W. Bush, the scheming businessman who used his father’s oil connections and political position to make his fortune, now takes charge of arguably the most important duty in the world – control of the nuclear button (actually a switch which is flicked). Surrounding him are advisors that harbour fundamentalist Christian values; hawkish secretaries committed to the militarisation of space; the captains of corporate capitalism and slick oil men. The right wing kooks and military spooks are in control at the White House and the Pentagon. It would make a good plot for Armageddon II.

The print version of this article contains two side pieces, ‘Bush Appoints CFR Members’ and ‘Another Skull & Bones President’.

Susan Bryce is an Australian journalist and publisher of the Australian Freedom & Survival Guide. Her interests include global politics, the new economy and the technologies of political control. The Australian Freedom & Survival Guide, a newsletter that airs the dirty laundry on the international surveillance regime, Transnational Corporations, Genetic Engineering, the New World Order, Defence & Military, WTO, IMF, World Bank, Globalisation. 6 issues per year $45.00. Sample issue $7.50. Web site: http://www.squirrel.com.au/~sbryce. Send cheque or money order payable to S. Bryce, PO Box 66, Kenilworth, Qld 4574, Australia. Email: sbryce@squirrel.com.au

© Copyright New Dawn Magazine, http://www.newdawnmagazine.com. Permission to re-send, post and place on web sites for non-commercial purposes, and if shown only in its entirety with no changes or additions. This notice must accompany all re-posting.

PARDONGATE AND BUSHFRAUD 

by Sherman H. Skolnick 3/18/01

skolnick@ameritech.net
http://www.skolnicksreport.com                                                
                                                                              
                                                 
Some continue to assert that George W. Bush is a tainted president, that
took the seat of power under circumstances they call BUSHFRAUD. Some go
even further, and proclaim that the Elder Bush and sons Jeb and George
W. are part of a "fascist coup". Others call the final hours of the
Clinton Administration as PARDONGATE. Thus referring to a foul smell
going up from some of more than 170 presidential pardons and
commutations Clinton entered at the last moments of his apparent
Constitutional authority.

A profound consideration of the events and players involved show there
are links between Pardongate and Bushfraud. Some of the players and
events:

===HUGH RODHAM, brother of the former First Lady HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON
elected in 2000 as a Senator from New York. Hillary is accused of taking
massive benefits, if not actual bribes, to arrange to set loose a group
of Hassidic Jews who swindled the federal government of some 30 million
dollars with a fake village development. Available to federal grand
juries looking into possible corruption by Clinton as president, are
audio tapes, and other evidence, directly implicating Hillary as reputed
"bag lady" for her husband; evidence which may become the basis of a
federal criminal indictment of her, and naming Bill as an unindicted
co-conspirator, for receiving financial benefits and emoluments as a
bribe or inducement to get her husband, then president, to pardon the
culprits.

As a Miami lawyer, Hugh Rodham seems to specialize in defending if not
actually arranging the affairs of sizeable dope traffickers. He is
reportedly very knowledgeable on cocaine trafficking from Colombia
involving the dope cartels as well as more recently, the activities of
the Russian mafiya combined with those illicit enterprises, all jointly
with international criminal MARC RICH, likewise pardoned by Clinton.
Rodham seemed to prosper during the some 15 years JANET RENO was a south
Florida state prosecutor who somehow did not see fit to run after
dopers. A Florida attorney, Jack Thompson, ran unsuccessfully to unseat
Reno in 1988 as state prosecutor. The monopoly press, he contends,
failed to report or act on his evidence and witnesses showing Reno was
subject to blackmail because she cavorted with lesbian prostitutes and
that she is a fallen down drunk who assisted known criminals. His offer
of testimony and evidence was likewise rebuffed by the U.S. Senate
Committee in 1993 that ratified Reno's appointment to head the U.S.
Justice Department.

Those in a position to know proclaim the acts and doings of Hugh Rodham
and Janet Reno were interwoven with JEB BUSH who became Florida
Governor. [Corruption knows no political party.] For a period starting
about 1977, with his latino wife, Jeb was stationed in Venezuela where
he headed or played a key role in the branch of Texas Commerce Bank,
owned in great part by his father, George Herbert Walker Bush and his
circle of oil-soaked confederates. Only rarely mentioned in the monopoly
press is that a sizeable portion of the dope money coming back to the
Colombian cartels is transacted through next-door Venezuela.

From that point, Jeb reportedly became interwoven with laundering the
funds of dope kingpins disguised often as huge real estate projects,
some of which went under, damaging innocent investors. Jeb was also the
eyes and ears on occasion of the American CIA in Venezuela. In its most
direct role, the CIA acts as the petroleum police in foreign oilfields.
Such as for the Rockefeller Family who own and dominate most oil
production in Venezuela. In a rare documentary, CBS' "60 Minutes"
Program once showed how apparently corrupt CIA officials together with
those of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration in Venezuela,
participated in large shipments of cocaine to the U.S., supposedly to
study how the dope cartel operates [as if they did not really
know].

A former espionage undercover operative who says he did business with
Jeb has numerous details in his book and on his website.
http://www.almartinraw.com

Upon receiving two hundred thousand dollars as a fee, Hugh Rodham
arranged with his brother-in-law, William Rockefeller Clinton, to
commute the jail sentence of CARLOS VIGNALI, who had served just six
years of a 15-year sentence for being the top dog in a drug ring that
distributed 800 lbs. of cocaine. The jail-bird's father, Horacio, a
wealthy Los Angeles parking lot owner, donates to political campaigns.
The younger Vignali is reportedly very well-informed about the dope from
Colombia smuggled across Canada and entering across the border to
Montana.

[Our interviews with middle-level members of the Rockefeller Family
together with other data convinces us Bill Clinton is the illegitimate
great grandson of old John D. Rockefeller, founder of the infamous
Standard Oil Trust.]

===MARC RACICOT, his term as Montana Governor ended January, 2001.
Knowledeable law enforcement personnel as well as several crusading
journalists have contended Racicot has reportedly been directly
implicated in the massive dope, from Red China and Colombia, coming
across the border from Canada. Side-kick of Bill and Roger Clinton,
Ollie North and the Elder Bush, namely Barry Seal, up to the time Seal
was murdered by the American CIA and the DEA to shut him up, arranged
the dope traffic from Canada through Montana. This was an alternative to
coming in through the southern states, such as at Mena, Arkansas, which
had become too well known. A former undercover government operative
involved in the Montana operations, described it:

"An aircraft departs Colombia, flies to the Bahamas to rest and refuel,
and then, when a weather window opens, continues the flight to Nova
Scotia or Quebec. Again, rest and refuel. Then continue to a US-Canadian
border landing strip." The former operative goes on to detail the acts
and doings of FBI Senior Agent Terry Nelson, of southern Florida FBI
office, who has business and relatives near the U.S., Montana-Canada
border: "Nelson not only recruits the law enforcement officials and
politicians he needs, he can also supply data from the law enforcement
arena such as the DEA NADDIS computer, Customs TECS II, EPIC, FBI, and
others involved in ongoing investigations. Nelson then provides this
intelligence to his drug contacts. This helps obstruct any investigation
and diffuse potential problems. Terry Nelson, a senior agent of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, continues to provide his valuable
services to drug cartels and others who will pay his fee, out of his FBI
office in southern Florida." Excerpts from "DRUGGING AMERICA" by Rodney
Stich, page 297, and page 294 as to Barry Seal, chapter on "Montana Drug
Gateway". 1999, Diabolo Western Press, P.O. Box 5, Alamo, California
94507.

Other contend that the Clinton White House blocked Canadian law
enforcement from serving an arrest warrant on Nelson when he was in the
area.

During the Presidential election turmoil in Florida, November and
December, 2000, then Montana Governor Marc Racicot was the trusted
"hatchet man" for George W. and Jeb Bush. Racicot was trusted because he
was reportedly part of the Bush family's worldwide laundering of
hundreds of billions of dollars of illicit dealings through 25 secret
Bush accounts worldwide. [Visit our website series, with attached
documents, "Greenspan Aids and Bribes Bush Family".]

Racicot together with operatives linked to Florida Senior FBI Agent
Terry Nelson, jointly with Hugh Rodham, reportedly arranged to convey
financial benefits and emoluments to top DEMOCRAT officials in southern
Florida---called by some straight out bribes---to arrange for the
DEMOCRATS to arbitrarily stop the recount of ballots. This done to
prevent Albert Gore, Jr., from winning Florida's essential Electoral
College vote and hence the U.S. Presidency, after Gore had already won
the national popular vote by a plurality of more than six hundred
thousand votes. The funds for the financial benefits, or bribes, were
made available through Marc Rich and his cronies in the Russian mafiya
which have joined forces with the Colombian dope cartels.

===ROGER CLINTON reportedly solicited and received a two hundred
thousand dollar pardongate bribe from the family of a convict in federal
prison on fraud charges. The bribe was reportedly shared by Roger with
brother Bill, at the time President, who did NOT grant the pardon. An
"honorable" crooked politician sells his office, and supplies services,
as he is paid. A stupid crook takes the bribe and reneges. Part of the
Roger Clinton pardongate was the ostensible smuggling of dope into the
U.S. from Southwest Red China, disguised as commodities. Roger Clinton
and his cronies apparently laundered the proceeds through two Chicago
commodity brokers known to be fronting for the Red Chinese dope trade,
called "China White". See the reportedly related stories on our website
as to Rahm Emanuel, former Clinton White House Senior Advisor, more
recently Managing Director of Wasserstein Perella & Co., reputed experts
on laundering illicit Asian dealings. Also, REFCO-LFG Division, (Richard
Friedman &  Co.), a Chicago-based brokerage.

The Roger and Bill Clinton dope trafficking proceeds are laundered as
currency and commodity deals on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and the
Chicago Board of Trade. Bill as President often visited the Merc, as the
fountain of illicit funds. Alleged President George W. Bush follows the
pattern of his crony, Bill Clinton, and shortly after being inaugurated,
George W. likewise came to the fountain of money, the Merc, to put the
arm on them.

Several Federal Grand Juries have testimony available,or already under
subpoena, and in some instances, as of the date of this posting, already
heard, showing the following among other things:

(1) Roger Clinton may be indicted for various federal criminal offenses
along with Tony and Hugh Rodham, and Hillary Rodham Clinton as part of
details of pardongate. Facing being named in this as unindicted
co-conspirators are William Rockefeller Clinton, commonly called William
Jefferson Clinton, and his close crony, George W. Bush.

(2) Testimony and evidence related to the foregoing include the acts and
doings, of pardongate offenses overlapping onto election fraud, of
former Montana Governor Marc Racicot; Florida Senior FBI Agent Terry
Nelson and confederates; and Florida Governor Jeb Bush; and super
criminal Marc Rich.

(3) To avoid federal criminal indictment, or being named as unindicted
co-conspirators, some of the foregoing persons have given testimony or
are offering testimony against some of the others.

Reporters of all three major news networks have already interviewed or
have sought to interview various witnesses as to the foregoing,
including those available to testify or have already testified agfainst
Roger Clinton. All the Chief Judges in charge of the Federal grand
Juries, so far as is now known, have NOT entered a "gag order"
preventing witnesses from being interviewed by the press. Despite that,
the George Bush 2nd White House has ordered the American Gestapo, the
FBI, to severely threaten and harass network reporters and executives;
the FBI claiming that the media people are supposedly "obstructing
justice", for example, by interviewing witnesses fingering Roger Clinton
wherein brother Bill along with crony George W. Bush would be named as
unindicted co-conspirators along with Marc Racicot and international
criminal Marc Rich.

An official of one of the news networks confided to us that he and his
associates are fearful for their lives, in view of the severe threats by
the FBI at the behest of the Bush White House. All three major networks
have so far embargoed video and audio tapes of interviews as to both
pardongate and Bushfraud. The FBI, according to the official, and
confirmed by his associates, has threatened network reporters, TV and
Radio crew members, as well as news managers, producers, and
supervisors.

[Key sources and eyewitnesses have confided in us, knowing that we have
a 40 year absolute policy against divulging sources and witnesses of our
data. In 40 years, as the head of our research and investigative group,
I have been jailed some 8 times, wheelchair and all, for "contempt of
court", for absolutely refusing to divulge witnesses and sources to
state and federal authorities publicly accused by us of high-level
corruption. In each instance, after being falsely and unlawfully jailed,
I was later vindicated, and the judges involved were themselves sent to
prison for bribery, tax evasion, and other crimes, as I had publicly
accused them to their face. [Visit our website for the four decade
background of our work.]

As part of a much lesser mess, reporters of Newsweek and Time Magazine
have reportedly compiled sufficient sources and records to show that
Florida Governor Jeb Bush and alleged President George W. Bush are part
of a sex-triangle with Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris who
played a key role in what some call Bushfraud. She was an instrumental
player by which Al Gore, Jr., was kept from being certified as the
winner of the Florida election and hence, kept from having the Electoral
College vote of Florida, Bush stealing thus the U.S. Presidential
Election 2000.

Like in the infamous 1876 Election that I have earlier written about,
Gore won the presidential election, as did Samuel Tilden, but like
Tilden, there has been a failure to inaugurate Gore as the President of
the United States.

Although both magazines have reportedly corroborated my story about Jeb
Bush-George W. Bush-Katherine Harris, with her also as the reputed "bag
lady" in fixing the election, the oil and dope soaked monopoly press are
too "chicken" and have too many financial hang-ups to so far go with the
Katherine Harris story.

Network officials and reporters have confided to us that the details in
this report are known by them to be substantially correct. BUT, the
press is reluctant to undermine George W. Bush at a time of impending
financial meltdown. More coming. Stay tuned.

Since 1958, Mr. Skolnick has been a court-reformer and since 1963,
founder/chairman, Citizen's Committee to Clean Up the Courts. Since
1991, a regular panelist and since 1995, moderator/producer,of
"Broadsides", a one-hour weekly public access Cable TV Program,
cablecast within Chicago to 400,000 viewers each Monday evening, 9 p.m.,
Channel 21 Cable TV. For a heavy packet of our printed stories, send
$5.00 [U.S. funds] and a stamped, self-addressed BUSINESS size envelope
[#10 envelope, 4-1/8 x 9-1/2] WITH THREE STAMPS ON IT, to Citizen's
Committee to Clean Up the courts, Sherman H. Skolnick, Chairman, 9800
So. Oglesby Ave., Chicago IL 60617 -4870. Office, 8 a.m. to midnight
most 7 days: (773) 375-5741

[PLEASE DO NOT BOMBARD THIS LISTED PHONE WITH JUST ROUTINE CALLS].

Updates of our work on a regular, not expensive, phone call message:
(773) 731-1100

WEBSITE: http://www.skolnicksreport.com
[NOTE "s" after name in website address.]

E-MAIL:  skolnick@amereitech.net

TomPaine.commentary

SPORTS STADIUM SUBSIDIES: THE GREAT AMERICAN SCAM

Text and Audio Versions
M. W. Guzy is a former police detective and school teacher who now
writes a weekly column for the St. Louis Post Dispatch.

This commentary was produced by Sharon Basco.

Despite numerous run-ins with the law, the late Al Capone fancied
himself a patriot. He once pledged, "My rackets are run on strictly
American lines, and they're going to stay that way."

It's a shame he didn't own a professional sport franchise for there
are few rackets more American than that one. The game is to use
public money to garner private profit and to get the public to
willingly acquiesce to the scheme.

The script is familiar. The forlorn millionaire who owns the team
will appeal to the community to build him a new stadium featuring
more of the highly lucrative luxury boxes than the old one has. He
will explain that in an age of ever-escalating salaries, more revenue
must be generated in order for the team to "remain competitive." The
implication is that the increased profits will be re-invested in the
team, thus providing the public with a better product.

Of course, when you operate within the friendly confines of a
monopoly, just what it means to "remain competitive" is somewhat
nebulous. Taxpayers have no say in the operation of the franchise,
but are fully responsible for underwriting the venture.

In 1989, George W. Bush was part of an investment group that bought
the struggling Texas Rangers. One of his partners was sports
speculator William DeWitt Jr., who at various times has also held
interests in the Baltimore Orioles, the Cincinnati Reds and the
Cincinnati Bengals.

Bush and his partners appealed to taxpayers to build a new stadium to
rejuvenate the team. Once the new, publicly financed facility was in
place, the value of the franchise skyrocketed, allowing the Bush-
DeWitt group to sell out at a massive profit. His take in hand, Bush
then ran for governor as a tax-cutting fiscal conservative intent on
reducing public expenditures.

While G.W. has moved on to the White House, DeWitt is now part owner
of the St. Louis Cardinals. Perhaps not coincidentally, there is an
effort underway to build a new stadium in that city. To put that
proposal in context, you have to understand how the present owners
acquired the team.
In 1996, Anheuser-Busch decided to get out of baseball. As a gesture
of corporate citizenship, they sold the Cardinals, Busch Stadium and
the two high-rise parking garages adjacent to it to a local group for
the very generous price of $150 million. The new owners subsequently
sold the garages for $91 million, meaning that they had acquired one
of the most valuable franchises in professional sports and a 30-year-
old stadium for the fire sale figure of $59 million. Somehow, these
otherwise successful businessmen are unable to clear a profit out of
this deal and are now demanding a $370 million retro-style ballpark
for the team to "remain competitive."

Once again, the taxpayers find themselves between a rock and a hard
place. If they agree to pony up the cash for a new park, the value of
the team will increase, tempting the current owners to sell at an
enormous profit generated by public money. Should this occur, the
enhanced revenue that was supposed to keep the team competitive will
now go to servicing the new owner's debt while baseball operations
are funded at present -- or even, reduced -- levels.

The fans' dividend in all this? Thirty-three games into the present
season, the Texas Rangers find themselves dead last in the AL West,
already 12 games out. Let's hope they can "remain competitive."

This is M.W. Guzy for TomPaine.com.

Reprinted from:  tompaine.com

Robert Sterling
Editor, The Konformist
http://www.konformist.com


June 18, 2001

Shrub Flubs His Dub

by MOLLY IVINS

Austin

Oh, sure, blame it on Texas. It's all our fault Jim Jeffords walked.
Many, many people in Washington are assuming "the Texans" in the
White House are responsible for this massive screw-up. Whereas
everybody in political Austin assumes it. It's often hard to discern
the difference between Texas Tough and Texas Stupid.

Sheesh, you play a little hardball, and the guy quits the party over
it? So there was a slight miscalculation. As Lyndon Johnson used to
say, in his charming fashion, "You got their peckers in your pocket,
their hearts and minds will follow." There was just a tiny error
about the localization of Jeffords's pecker. Texans are also proud
that Senator Phil Gramm, so noted for his charm, also played a role
in Jeffords's departure.

Karl Rove, the man known as "Bush's Brain," would never do anything
mean, dirty, petty or tacky. I say this because one of the things I
have learned from Rove and Karen Hughes--counselor to His Bushness
and also known as Nurse Ratchet--is that if you say something often
enough, like "compassionate conservative" or "leave no child behind,"
the reality makes no difference; people remember only the slogan.
(One of the funnier slogans, from Bush's last run for governor,
was "end social promotion." Social promotion is the story of Bush's
life. The Lege just ended ending social promotion--it doesn't work.)
Rove is the master of bait-and-switch politics: Talk moderate, govern
right. It took a real moderate like Jeffords to bring this to the
media's attention.

One of the post-switch defenses put out by the White House is that
Jeffords left the party over a petty social slight: If it was petty
of Jeffords to mind not being invited to the ceremony honoring the
Teacher of the Year, how petty was it of the Bushes not to invite
him? This kind of circular thinking leads people to conclude the
Bushies think their own shit don't stink.

When Texas sent the nation Billy Bob Forehead for President, we did,
in fact, try to warn y'all about Rove. He not only goes after
Democrats, his record of attacking Republicans who cross him is
equally distinguished. Rumor and slur campaigns are among his
favorite methods. He started using dirty tricks when he was with the
College Republicans and has since been linked to the rumors that Ann
Richards is a lesbian (a perennial for any woman in politics), that
John McCain is crazy as a result of his years in prison camp and
several other notable doozies. The campaign against McCain in South
Carolina during the primaries was a Rove classic. McCain was
simultaneously rumored to be gay and a tomcat who cheats on his wife,
who in turn was rumored to be a drug addict. The news that McCain has
a black daughter (adopted from Bangladesh) was spread judiciously
under the radar of the national media. Anonymous leaflets put under
the windshield wipers of cars parked at white fundamentalist churches
on Sunday are good for this purpose, as are certain radio call-in
shows.

According to the May 14 issue of the conservative Weekly Standard,
before Jeffords switched: "The White House and Senate sources say it
[the social snub] was a taste of things to come for Jeffords. 'The
White House is not giving specifics,' says a senior GOP source. 'But
there's a one- or two-year plan to punish him for his behavior. And
it's stuff that may hurt him, but stuff that's not going to draw a
significant amount of attention. So they're going to get him.'" This
fits so well with Rove's past patterns that the reaction to
Jeffords's switch at the Texas capitol was unanimous--a Rove play
that went bad.

In intraparty fights, Rove often uses money. Tom Pauken is a Dallas
lawyer and sort of a right-wing populist who was elected chairman of
the state party against Rove's wishes: He was the candidate of the
Christian right, and the Bushies favored a more establishment
candidate. So after Pauken won, Rove called the big party donors, and
their money suddenly went to political accounts controlled by Rove
rather than to the state party. Then two sort of wacko Christian
Republicans on the state school board went to New Hampshire last year
to endorse Steve Forbes and returned to find their opponents flush
with money from Bush givers: a rare confluence of Rove's revenge and
general civic betterment. "You don't cross Karl Rove and not expect
repercussions," said Bob Offutt of the state school board after he
lost the primary.

Meanwhile, the Texas capitol has just lived through a session-long
hangover from the Bush years. Tax cuts in two successive
sessions, '97 and '99, left the state's cupboard bare. There was no
money for getting up to average in anything: Our state motto is
still "Forever 48th." Despite a record $114 billion budget (that's
for two years), we are not even sure many of our miserly programs
will keep pace with population growth. If they didn't cost money, a
lot of things Bush opposed could get done this session. The Lege
passed a hate crimes bill, gave prison inmates in the Cowboy Gulag
access to DNA testing and made it illegal to put kids in the back of
your pickup. Unfortunately, they could not bring themselves to stop
executing the retarded. We did finally get health insurance for
teachers--now there's a coup. Despite a rousing economy, all the
money was blown by Bush in tax cuts that came to a Big Mac a month.
Most Texans never saw even that much, since the desperate school
districts hiked their tax rates as soon as the state cut its.

The lobbyists, who know more than anyone else, are betting Texas will
have to go to an income tax within two sessions because of the Bush
cuts. A state income tax is anathema here, and has been desperately
avoided by generations of pols.

Bush was replaced by his exceedingly Lite Guv Rick Perry, who has
really good hair. Governor Goodhair, or the Ken Doll (see, all Texans
use nicknames--it's not that odd), is not the sharpest knife in the
drawer. But the chair of a major House committee says, "Goodhair is
much more engaged as governor than Bush was." As the refrain of the
country song goes, "O Please, Dear God, Not Another One."

 

IT'S NEVER BEEN EASIER TO 'FOLLOW THE MONEY' Bush Donors Cash In Mark Weisbrot is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. He is co-author, with Dean Baker, of Social Security: the Phony Crisis. The Bush administration's energy proposal is the latest in a series of initiatives that give "transparency" in government a whole new meaning. Campaign contributors are cashing in on their investments, and every week is "payback" week. It's taken quite a stretch to use electricity shortages as an excuse for drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, but George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are making a heroic effort. So what if only 3 percent of our electricity comes from oil? The more relevant number here is 78 percent: that's how much of the oil and gas industry's record $32.6 million contribution went to Republicans in the last election cycle. The administration's arguments about energy security don't hold up much better. Drilling the Wildlife Refuge full of oil wells would not have much impact on oil or gasoline prices, since oil prices are determined in a world market. The supply impact would be minimal and no different from oil obtained anywhere else in the world; and OPEC could always cut back production to compensate for it. Of course, if we were really concerned about long-term energy security, the best strategy would be to leave the oil in the ground, in case imports are not so readily available some day. But this is not energy planning -- if it were, we'd see more than the token one-tenth of one percent of our energy dollars allocated to developing renewable energy sources such as solar and wind. Or conservation: five of the nation's top laboratories have estimated that we can reduce the growth in electricity demand by 20 to 47 percent by increasing energy efficiency. These scientists didn't get any face time with Dick Cheney when the secretive Energy Development Task Force -- dubbed the "Alaska jihad" by its leaders -- put together the administration's proposal. But Kenneth Lay, chairman of Enron Corp. got a half hour with the Vice President to lobby for what he wanted. The proposal sees deregulation -- the cause of California's soaring electricity prices -- as the way of the future. And why not? Consumers got fleeced for billions of dollars, and a good chunk of it went to Enron -- an excellent return on their $1.7 million contribution to Republicans in the last election, as well as their long-term investments in Mr. Bush's political career. There will be no price caps to protect consumers from the effects of deregulation, even though the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has the power to do that, and even to force a refunding of money already ripped off. There will be no closing of the loophole that allows SUV's and pick-up trucks to be exempt from federal mileage standards -- just ask White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card, former chief lobbyist for the auto industry. The administration's energy policy seems to be based on the same strategy as its economic policy. Faced with a real short-term problem, do nothing to resolve it, but use it to sell long-term changes that reward your friends. The Bush tax cut will do little or nothing to counter the current economic slowdown, instead rewriting the tax code to give hundreds of billions of dollars to the richest people in America over the next decade. Then there was the bankruptcy bill: a timely gift to credit card companies at the expense of millions of people (median income: $22,000) who are unable to make ends meet -- mostly due to loss of a job, poor health, or divorce. Kick 'em while they're down. The credit card giant MBNA was the largest corporate contributor to the Bush campaign. Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical companies have been using their clout to block a universal Medicare prescription drug benefit. And the Wall Street firms that would rake in billions from privatizing Social Security got one of the most stacked presidential commissions in history -- unanimously pro-privatization -- to fix a problem that doesn't even exist. That's how our free market election system works: you vote with your dollars. President Bush has made it easier than ever to "follow the money," but the media has been mostly kind to him. Alternating between the confused look of a student who knows he is faking it, and that impish gleam, he has charmed the press and rides high in the polls. And he does deliver some good jokes. "You can fool some of the people all of the time" -- Mr. Bush quipped at a Washington dinner -- "and those are the ones you want to concentrate on." Too bad he wasn't kidding.                                  Reproduced from:

George W. Bush and Jesus Christ
What Would Jesus Say About the Death Penalty?

David Corn is the Washington editor of the Nation. His first novel, Deep Background, a political thriller, was published recently by St. Martin's Press.

To respond to this article click here and send us an e mail.

If Jesus were alive today, would he be working as an executioner in a Texas prison? That's a question I'd like to see one of the local reporters put to George W. Bush during a presidential debate. Bush should be pushed on the smug answer he provided at an Iowa debate last month, when he was asked to name his favorite political philosopher. "Christ," Bush piped up, "because he changed my heart." Pressed for an explanation, he petulantly said, If you don't get it, you don't get it. And during last week's GOP debate in New Hampshire, Bush called Jesus' teachings the "foundation for how I live my life."

How precisely has the political philosophy of J.C. transformed George W. - especially on public policy matters? Jesus, after all, did have something to say about politics (boot those money-changers out of the temple!) and the treatment of the poor. Regarding one of the most fundamental political issues - the right of the state to kill a person - the words of Jesus have had little impact on Bush. In the past two years, Gov. Bush has presided over 55 executions in Texas. That's one-third of the nation's total. Since he assumed office in 1995, his state has snuffed 112 people. In fact, one of Bush's undeniable accomplishments as governor has been to restrict the appeals process so executions could proceed with more dispatch. (In Florida, his brother Gov. Jeb - whose relationship to the carpenter-messiah is not as well-known - is attempting to copy George's "success.") What would Bush's personal savior, who himself was executed, make of this?

Simpleminded death-penalty advocates searching for religious justification can point to the "eye for an eye" chestnut in the Old Testament and ignore that inconvenient "thou shall not kill" commandment. But Bush's number-one political philosopher had some thoughts of his own on this topic. So says the United Methodist Church. That's Bush's church, for the born-again Bush has been a practicing Methodist since he married his wife Laura. In 1980, the United Methodist Church passed a resolution opposing capital punishment that noted, "In spite of a common assumption to the contrary, 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' does not give justification for the imposing of the penalty of death. Jesus explicitly repudiated the lex talionis (Matthew 5:38-39), and the Talmud denies its literal meaning and holds that it refers to financial indemnities. When a woman was brought before Jesus having committed a crime for which the death penalty was commonly imposed, our Lord so persisted in questioning the moral authority of those who were ready to conduct the execution that they finally dismissed the charges. (John 8:31)."

As it happens, my office is next to the Washington office of a Christian denomination - Newt Gingrich lives on the floor below ours - and one of the workers there, Lisa Henderson, has long been my informal consultant on all matters biblical. I toss her questions such as, "Where do the religious conservatives get that line about wives being subservient to husbands?" In return, she shoots me queries about Judaism, such as, "Do Jews celebrate the Year 2000 New Year's?" So recently I popped my head in the door of her suite and said, "Jesus Christ and the death penalty - what do you got?" Within minutes, she had a slew of citations that ought to make Bush cringe. There's Matthew 5:21, where Jesus is said to have said: "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of judgment." Two lines earlier, Bush's greatest influence is quoted declaring, "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least [Ten] commandments shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." In the Book of James, this sentiment is reiterated: "Do not kill... yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law." And there is the good ol' Sermon on the Mount, where Jesus observed, "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy." That point is also made in James: "For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy."

As the head of the state government that has killed more people than any other - the pace of execution increased 75 percent there from 1998 to 1999 - Bush has much blood on his hands. Regarding killing, Jesus' philosophy seems clear. A question for the governor: Why has the Son of God, who supposedly has brought you salvation, left your heart untouched on this issue of life and death?

Crap. The Sequel: The Crap Ends Here by Michael Moore Filmmaker ( "Roger & Me," "The Big One").

http://www.onlinejournal.com

It's time to demand a Senate investigation into Dubya's "Harkengate"
By James Hatfield

"It must in no way be construed as indicating that the party has been
exonerated or that no action may ultimately result."—A reference to
Dubya in a letter regarding an SEC investigation into possible
insider trading

June 20, 2001—Now that the Democrats are once again running the show
in the U.S. Senate, they need to make up for lost time and get down
to the real business of government—spending millions and millions of
taxpayer money on investigative probes and special prosecutors.

Balzac once said, "Behind every great fortune there is a crime."
Dubya became a multimillionaire a couple of years ago because of an
insider stock sale he pulled off almost exactly 11 years to the day.

So if the Republicans can waste our hard-earned money on a multi-
year, multimillion-dollar expanded probe of a losing land proposition
in Arkansas, then it's time to demand an investigation into what I'll
coin as "Harkengate."

But before we get to Dubya's financial shenanigans, let's take a
quick jaunt down memory lane to make sure everything is put in its
proper perspective. I just don't want anyone crying "foul" when I
demand equal justice, tit-for-tat, and what's good for the goose is
good for the gander payback time.

The so-called "Whitewater" scandal started with a little real estate
deal 20 years ago. In 1978, then-Arkansas Attorney General Bill
Clinton and his wife, Hillary, became limited partners* in a venture
with James and Susan McDougal to buy 220 acres of riverfront land and
form the Whitewater Development Corp. The goal was to sell lots for
vacation homes. But the partnership did poorly and finally dissolved
in 1992, leaving the Clintons reporting a net loss of more than
$40,000.

Over time, the investigation known as Whitewater grew well beyond
allegations related to the Clintons' financial and legal dealings in
Arkansas. It also encompassed such unrelated events as the firing of
White House travel office clerks, the 1993 suicide of White House
counsel Vincent Foster and his filing of delinquent Whitewater Corp.
tax returns, the collection of hundreds of confidential FBI files on
prominent Republicans by a minor White House operative in 1993 and
1994, and, of course, the sex scandal involving Cigar Aficionado
poster girl Monica Lewinsky.

The original Whitewater special prosecutor was Robert B. Fiske, Jr.,
a moderate Republican selected in January 1994 by Attorney General
Janet Reno, who had the authority to make the appointment because the
independent counsel law had expired.

In August 1994, with the law renewed and Fiske under fire from
conservatives for lacking a pitbull aggressiveness in pursuit of the
Clintons, the three-judge panel in charge of appointing independent
counsels abruptly replaced him with a conservative activist named
Kenneth W. Starr. (Starr had been a top aide in the Reagan Justice
Department, a federal appeals court judge and then solicitor general
under the first President Bush.)

Now that I've hopefully jump-started your memories of Whitewater and
how it all spun wildly out of control, let's once again revisit 1990
when the elder Bush was living in the White House and Dubya was being
paid $120,000 a year (plus extensive stock options) to sit on the
board of directors of Texas-based Harken Energy Corporation.

The small oil company's financial advisers at Smith Barney issued a
detrimental report, expressing urgent concern in the company's
rapidly deteriorating financial standing. (Harken owed more than $150
million to banks and other creditors while its assets were tied up in
a Middle Eastern drilling venture.)

On June 22, 1990, Dubya abruptly unloaded 60 percent of his Harken
stock—212,140 shares—for a handsome little profit of $848,560, plus
some change. The transaction came a week prior to the end of a
quarter in which the company lost $23.2 million. A quarterly report,
issued in August 1990 documented the loss and company stock plummeted
to $2.37 per share.

It just goes to show you even a blind squirrel can find an acorn once
in awhile.

Dubya, who sold at $4.12 per share, denied having any inside
knowledge at the time (and to think they called Clinton "Slick
Willie"!), although he sat on Harken's board, its audit committee and
a panel looking at corporate restructuring, which had met in May and
worked directly with the Smith Barney financial consultants.

Dubya's June 1990 transaction was an insider stock sale, but
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) records indicate he did not
file the required disclosure form, which was due no later than July
10, until eight months later. (He later maintained that it was filed
on time but the paperwork was lost by the SEC.)

"I'm very comfortable in looking you in the eye and saying I did
nothing wrong on this," he told the press back then, adding that the
Harken stock sale was "entirely legal and proper."

The SEC investigated King George I's son in 1991 for possible insider
trading, the allegation of selling the stock with an insider's
knowledge of non-public, market-moving news, such as a poor earnings
report, but ended its review in October 1993 without filing charges.

"Please be advised," Bruce A. Hiler, associate director of the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission's enforcement division, said in
the letter to Bush's attorney, "that the investigation has been
terminated as to the conduct of Mr. Bush and that, at this time, no
enforcement is contemplated with respect to him."

But another passage in the SEC letter is the key as to whether a
senate subcommittee should be convened to thoroughly investigate
Dubya's guilt or innocence: "It must in no way be construed as
indicating that the party has been exonerated or that no action may
ultimately result."

Yeah, folks, it says exactly what you think: The SEC never said he
wasn't dirty and Shrub may "ultimately" need a good scrubbin.'

Was it a real investigation or a whitewash of an insider stock sale
by the very fortunate son of a sitting president of the United
States? At best, it was it incomplete, and at worst, a cover-up.

Personally, I think it was the latter.

The inquiry was sullied because the SEC chairman at the time was
Richard Breeden, a former lawyer with the Houston-based law firm
Baker & Botts. Breeden had been deputy counsel to Dubya's papa when
he was vice president and received his SEC appointment after Bush
moved into the White House.

In addition, the SEC general counsel was James R. Doty, who, working
previously as a private lawyer, assisted Dubya in negotiating the
legal contract for the purchase of the Texas Rangers baseball team in
1989. (Dubya had acknowledged that he sold the Harken shares to repay
$500,000 in loans from the United Bank in Midland, which he used to
fund his stake in the Rangers partnership.)

"The case was handled and all decisions in the case were made by
enforcement division attorneys, all of whom are career prosecutors,"
claimed William McLucas, the SEC's director of
enforcement. "Investigations conducted by the commission and the
enforcement division are free of political influence, and this
investigation was no different," he added.

Dubya, who took eight months to notify the government of his sale of
Harken stock, also missed the filing deadline for reporting other
insider trades involving the Texas oil company, according to SEC
records.

His November 1, 1986 acquisition of 212,152 shares of Harken stock as
a result of the merger of his Spectrum 7 company with Harken was not
reported until April 7, 1987. (The filing also disclosed Dubya's
March 10, 1987, purchase of an additional 80,000 shares.)
 
An April 22, 1987 filing listed a December 10, 1986 purchase of
80,000 shares of Harken stock. Dubya's attorney stated that it was
the same 80,000 shares reported in the April 7, 1987 filing, but
could not explain why it was reported twice or which date was correct.
 
His June 16, 1989 purchase of 25,000 shares of Harken Energy stock
was not reported until a September 7, 1989 filing.
 
With his windfall of almost $850,000 from the sale of Harken stock in
1990 (as the company continued its downward spiral and record
losses), Dubya paid back his $500,000 loan to the Midand banks that
helped him finance his ownership interest in the Texas Rangers
professional baseball team less than a year ealier.

In 1998—a mere 3 years ago—media mogul Tom Hicks, the owner of the
Dallas Stars, agreed to purchase the Texas Rangers for $250 million,
the second-highest franchise fee paid in baseball history.

Hicks was not only paying for the team, but also the state-of-the-art
stadium—which the Rangers owned but taxpayers paid for through a half-
cent sales-tax levy—and three hundred acres of prime development land
next to the sports facility and the Six Flags Over Texas amusement
park. (Financial World named The Ballpark at Arlington in 1997 the
most profitable venue in major league baseball.)

"Taxpayers put up the money that increased the value of this
franchise, and Governor Bush is the beneficiary," claimed one state
legislator at the time, who questioned the ethics of the deal and
unsuccessfully pushed his colleagues for an investigation. Others
called it "outright corporate welfare."

With Hicks' purchase of the Rangers for $250 million, Dubya became an
overnight multimillionaire, receiving almost $15 million on an
initial investment in 1989 that totaled a mere $606,000—a profit of
more than 2,300 percent.

"When it is all said and done, I will have made more money than I
ever dreamed I would make," the awshucks soon-to-be presidential
candidate told reporters the day after the sale to Hicks was
announced.

In 1986, the West Texas oilman had claimed he was "all name and no
money," but a dozen years later Dubya was both.

So bring on the special Senate investigations to look into possible
insider trading and undue political influence and let's get down and
dirty.

And while the boys on Capitol Hill are digging into "Harkengate,"
they need to find out why top execs at many of the large power
companies have profited substantially from California's energy
crisis. According to the June 13, 2001 edition of the Los Angeles
Times, several of them—including Dubya's Houston buddy and sugar
daddy, Enron CEO Jeffrey K. Skilling, have gained millions in stock
sales at two, three, and even 10 times the level of prior years.

As reported by Jerry Hirsch in the Times, here are just some of the
energy company executives who have been accused of profiteering while
California's residents are paying out the nose:

Kenneth Lay, chairman of Enron, netted $123 million in option
transactions in 2000, triple his 1999 level and almost 10 times his
1998 net.
 
Robert D. Doty Jr., chief financial officer of Dynegy, exercised
options at $1.47 a share to purchase 40,000 shares of the company's
stock Oct. 4. He then sold the shares for $54.66 each, netting $2.13
million.
 
Lou Pai, chairman and chief executive of Enron Energy Services, filed
regulatory documents May 18 and May 29 announcing his intention to
sell 390,000 shares of Enron stock for $21.17 million.
 
Peter Cartwright, chairman and chief executive of Calpine, from Feb.
22 to March 2 exercised 188,000 options to purchase shares of his
company at prices ranging from 7 cents to $1.07. He netted $11.81
million.
 
David Arledge, a director of El Paso Corp., sold company stock for
$23.28 million March 6 and 7.
 
Harvey Padewer, president of Duke Energy Corp.'s Energy Services
division, sold Duke stock for $12.26 million in February, netting
$2.99 million.
 
Jeffrey K. Skilling, chief executive of Enron, filed regulatory
documents May 16 announcing his intention to sell 140,000 shares of
Enron stock for $7.98 million. In 2000, he netted more than $62
million in similar transactions.
"It stands to reason that if the companies are making exorbitant
profits," noted Loretta Lynch, president of the California Public
Utilities Commission, "then the individuals who run the companies are
also making exorbitant profits."

My favorite uncle, Coburn R. Howard of Tennessee, a WW II vet,
lifelong Democrat and union activist who passed away a couple of
years ago, was right (as he was much of the time). "When the
Republicans are in office, the rich just get richer and the poor just
get poorer."

We'll do this all again next week, folks, so please come back.

The George W. Butcher of the Spanish Language Award of the
Week: "Bush, in a taped interview with Spanish TV 'mispronounced the
prime minister's name.' Bush said he looked forward to meeting Aznar—
but the name came out as Anzar.' Bush also 'mangled Spanish grammar
with gender disagreement and emphasis on the wrong syllables.' 'If I
don't practice I am going to destroy this language.'—Bush, on his
Spanish."–AP, 6/12/01, as reported by Hotline.


* Limited partners are just that. They have no say in the operation
of a business.


© 2001 Omega Publishing Endeavours, Inc.

James Hatfield, the controversial, New York Times best-selling author
of Fortunate Son: George W. Bush and the Making of an American
President, is a frequent political commentator on radio stations
across the country. He can be reached at omegapublishing@hotmail.com


If you are interested in a free subscription to The
Konformist Newswire,  please visit:

http://www.eGroups.com/list/konformist

Firm's Iraq Deals Greater Than Cheney Has Said
Affiliates Had $73 Million in Contracts

By Colum Lynch
Special to The Washington Post
Saturday, June 23, 2001; Page A01

UNITED NATIONS -- During last year's presidential campaign, Richard B. Cheney acknowledged that the oil-field supply corporation he headed, Halliburton Co., did business with Libya and Iran through foreign subsidiaries. But he insisted that he had imposed a "firm policy" against trading with Iraq.

"Iraq's different," he said.

According to oil industry executives and confidential United Nations records, however, Halliburton held stakes in two firms that signed contracts to sell more than $73 million in oil production equipment and spare parts to Iraq while Cheney was chairman and chief executive officer of the Dallas-based company.

Two former senior executives of the Halliburton subsidiaries say that, as far as they knew, there was no policy against doing business with Iraq. One of the executives also says that although he never spoke directly to Cheney about the Iraqi contracts, he is certain Cheney knew about them.
...
Halliburton's trade with Iraq was first reported by The Washington Post in February 2000. But U.N. records recently obtained by The Post show that the dealings were more extensive than originally reported and than Vice President Cheney has acknowledged.

As secretary of defense in the first Bush administration, Cheney helped to lead a multinational coalition against Iraq in the Persian Gulf War and to devise a comprehensive economic embargo to isolate Saddam Hussein's government. After Cheney was named in 1995 to head Halliburton, he promised to maintain a hard line against Baghdad.

But in 1998, Cheney oversaw Halliburton's acquisition of Dresser Industries Inc., which exported equipment to Iraq through two subsidiaries of a joint venture with another large U.S. equipment maker, Ingersoll-Rand Co.

The subsidiaries, Dresser-Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co., sold water and sewage treatment pumps, spare parts for oil facilities and pipeline equipment to Baghdad through French affiliates from the first half of 1997 to the summer of 2000, U.N. records show. Ingersoll Dresser Pump also signed contracts -- later blocked by the United States -- to help repair an Iraqi oil terminal that U.S.-led military forces destroyed in the Gulf War.

Former executives at the subsidiaries said they had never heard objections -- from Cheney or any other Halliburton official -- to trading with Baghdad.
...
Cheney has offered contradictory accounts of how much he knew about Halliburton's dealings with Iraq. In a July 30, 2000, interview on ABC-TV's "This Week," he denied that Halliburton or its subsidiaries traded with Baghdad.

"I had a firm policy that we wouldn't do anything in Iraq, even arrangements that were supposedly legal," he said. "We've not done any business in Iraq since U.N. sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a standing policy that I wouldn't do that."

Cheney modified his response in an interview on the same program three weeks later, after he was informed that a Halliburton spokesman had acknowledged that Dresser Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump traded with Iraq.

He said he was unaware that the subsidiaries were doing business with the Iraqi regime when Halliburton purchased Dresser Industries in September 1998.

"We inherited two joint ventures with Ingersoll-Rand that were selling some parts into Iraq," Cheney explained, "but we divested ourselves of those interests."

The divestiture, however, was not immediate. The firms traded with Baghdad for more than a year under Cheney, signing nearly $30 million in contracts before he sold Halliburton's 49 percent stake in Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co. in December 1999 and its 51 percent interest in Dresser Rand to Ingersoll-Rand in February 2000, according to U.N. records.
...

full article is at <http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35751-2001Jun22.html>

Beast of the Month - June 2001
Antonin Scalia, "Gang of Five" Supreme Court Mastermind

Robert Sterling
Editor, The Konformist
http://www.konformist.com 
http://www.konformist.com/botm/volume05/botm0601.htm 

Beast of the Month - June 2001
Antonin Scalia, "Gang of Five" Supreme Court Mastermind

"I yam an anti-Christ..."
John Lydon (aka Johnny Rotten) of The Sex Pistols, "Anarchy in the UK"

"Although we may never know with complete certainty the identity of 
the winner of this year's Presidential election, the identity of the 
loser is perfectly clear. It is the Nation's confidence in the judge 
as an impartial guardian of the rule of law."
John Paul Stevens, Dissenting Opinion, Bush vs. Gore


On December 12, 2000, the United States Supreme Court handed out its 
most notorious decision in over 100 years, rivaling Dred Scott and 
Plessy vs. Ferguson in its contempt for justice.  On this day of 
infamy, the Supremes ruled that the hand counting of votes in the 
state of Florida (an action which had always been rightfully 
considered the only accurate way to decide the winner in a close 
contest) was unconstitutional.  The official reasoning?  Because each 
county could determine what constituted a vote by a different 
interpretation of the legislature's phrase "clear intent of the 
voter", there was supposed unequal protection in the right to vote by 
the recount.  (Never mind that less accurate vote-counting systems in 
poorer areas were discriminating in themselves, or that the Florida 
Supreme Court chose not to define the meaning of "clear intent" based 
on a ruling by the Supreme Court not to "change the rules".)  With 
distorted non-logic, the Supreme Court effectively overthrew the will 
of the public of both the country and the state of Florida, by 
depriving votes for the actual winner of the Presidency, Al Gore, to 
be counted.  The end result was the fraudulent installation of a 
naked emperor who has waged a cynical and self-serving agenda since 
his bogus victory.  Even more important, one of the most basic ideals 
of any legitimate government, the right of the people to be 
accurately and fairly represented, was effectively trampled upon by 
the court ruling.

In case you believe this last claim is mere hyperbole, here is the 
Supreme Court's own words in the majority decision: "The individual 
citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for 
the President of the United States."

If only the end result of the Supreme Court's phony ruling wasn't so 
huge, it would be amusing.  Imagine the conservative wing of the 
black-robed judges declaring concern over Fourteenth Amendment equal 
protection violations in the recount of votes, after years of 
ignoring real Fourteenth Amendment violations.  As The Consortium 
website noted, "Historically, Supreme Court liberals have used 'equal 
protection' principles to strike down discrimination against African-
Americans and other persecuted minorities."  In this case, turning 
the law upside down on its head, it was used to deprive the counting 
of votes in African-American areas.

Just as hilarious was the blatant conflict of interest by some of the 
judges involved.  For instance, Justices Antonin Scalia (the right-
wing ideologue mastermind of the Supreme Court and The Konformist 
Beast of the Month) has two sons who worked for firms directly 
involved with the Shrub side of the case.  Meanwhile, Clarence "I 
Love Long Dong Silver" Thomas' wife coordinated the hiring of 
Heritage Foundation associates by the Bush transition team.  And 
though Sandra Day O'Connor has no family ties to the case, she was 
visibly upset when the networks called Florida for Vice President Al 
Gore on Election Night.  "This is terrible," she stated, indicating 
very strongly that she wanted Bush to win.  Some suspect she wanted 
to retire and be replaced by a fellow conservative, while other 
believe her motivation was that she has the inside track for Chief 
Justice.  Whatever the motivations, three of the five justices ruling 
in the majority Bush vs. Gore had good reason to recuse themselves 
but chose not to in a stunning lack of ethics.

None of this should surprise anyone who has bothered to follow the 
history of the "Gang of Five" that mocked justice with their 
decision.  The quintet (Rehnquist, Scalia, Thomas O'Connor and 
Kennedy) are all the legacy of the Reagan-Bush years, with David 
Souter being the lone white sheep appointee.  Though they were 
appointed under the supposed mantras of "judicial restraint" 
and "states' rights", the lack of restraint and lack of respect for 
states' rights they showed while interfering with a presidential 
election is pretty hard proof that such buzz words are lies.

Of this right-wing majority, O'Connor and Kennedy are considered the 
swing "moderate" votes (whatever that means) with Rehnquist, Scalia 
and Thomas being the hard-liners.  Still, though Rehnquist is the 
Chief Justice, it is clear that Scalia is the mouth-foaming 
intellectual leader of the reactionary wing.  It is Scalia who first 
made the disturbing argument that there is no Constitutional right to 
vote for President.  And it is he who wrote the opinion blocking the 
counting of votes, claiming that it would cast a cloud upon the 
legitimacy of the Presidential election (which was true, since it 
would've officially showed that Bush's supposed victory was based on 
fraud.)  With Thomas as his slug-like sidekick, Antonin has led the 
court to an even more frightening path that Bush Vs. Gore was merely 
the most prominent insult.

Indeed, the only time they have shown restraint is when it has come 
to evading their duty of protecting civil liberties.  Meanwhile, 
attempts to regulate korporate power have been thwarted by this same 
combine, as they consistently halt these supposed examples of 
government overstep.  The obvious reality is that this reactionary 
majority does not stand for conservatism, but rather economic, social 
and political fascism.

The two-faced nature of the Supreme Court majority came into play 
last month, when the Court ruled in the case of U.S. vs. Oakland 
Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative.  At issue was whether the feds could 
close down an Oakland marijuana co-op, following a state voter-
approved initiative (Proposition 215) legalized the usage of medical 
marijuana in California.  Again, the Supremes threw out concepts like 
States' Rights and judicial restraint when they became inconvenient.  
On the surface, the 8-0 overruling of a 1999 appeals court decision 
appears decisive in favor of the Federal government (Breyer, showing 
ethics Scalia, Thomas and O'Connor lack, recused himself because his 
brother originally presided over the case.)  However, there is more 
than meets the eye here: the Supreme Court (as decisively proven last 
December) is a political animal, and neither side was confident that 
they had the votes on the bigger issue: if medical necessity could 
overrule federal law in a case involving individual patients (rather 
than organized distribution groups.)  The Scalia-Thomas-Rehnquist 
wing apparently were scared that either O'Connor or Kennedy wouldn't 
go along with such an argument, so they crafted a decision that would 
punt the bigger issue.  In the majority opinion, however, Thomas (a 
former lawyer for Monsanto, a noted money recipient in the War 
Against Marijuana) took some time off from watching porn videos and 
bluntly declared:

"In this case, the Court of Appeals erred by considering relevant the 
evidence that some people have 'serious medical conditions for whom 
the use of cannabis is necessary in order to treat or alleviate those 
conditions of their symptoms,' that these people 'will suffer serious 
harm if they are denied cannabis,' and that 'there is no legal 
alternative to cannabis for the effective treatment of their medical 
conditions.'...  It is clear from the text of the act that Congress 
has made a determination that marijuana has no medical benefits 
worthy of an exception."


In other words, because Congress has stated marijuana has no medical 
benefits, it has no medical benefits.  (Two plus two equals five.)

His decision, unsurprisingly, was signed on only by Rehnquist, 
O'Connor, Kennedy and Scalia.  "It's not a rational decision," stated 
Keith Stroup of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana 
Laws (NORML).  "It reminds me of the Flat Earth Society."  "It's as 
if the government was saying the world was flat," concurred OCBC 
director Jeff Jones. Then, echoing correctly the analysis of Bush Vs. 
Gore, Jones added, "I liken it to the Dred Scott decision." 

Proving the pure hypocrisy of their stance (and indicating their 
decisions really only serve establishment big business interests), 
the same five judges ruled in March 2000 that the FDA couldn't 
regulate tobacco as a drug, arguing that the FDA had overstep its 
supposed bounds by such actions.  The decision, of course, was 5-4.  
Breyer, in his dissenting opinion, noted "Far more than most, this 
particular drug and device risks the life-threatening harms that 
administrative regulation seeks to rectify."  He then added with 
sarcasm, "The upshot is that the court today holds that a regulatory 
statute aimed at unsafe drugs and devices does not authorize 
regulation of a drug (nicotine) and a device (a cigarette) that the 
court itself finds unsafe."

Of course, such distorted logic should be expected from Scalia and 
co.  In 1990, he led a right-wing majority into ruling that states 
could forbid Native Americans from using peyote for religious 
purposes.  In his decision, Scalia stated that as a nation, "we 
cannot afford the luxury" of striking down laws simply because they 
limit someone's religious practices.  That's correct: according to 
Scalia, the Freedom of Religion is a "luxury."

Sorry Antonin, it isn't a luxury: it's a basic, natural right, a 
legal and ethical concept you apparently don't understand.  And 
though you and your cohorts may reject such values, you merely prove 
your lack of legitimacy by stating such profoundly alien viewpoints.

So what does the future hold?  It looks rather bleak: after 
all, "president" Bush has declared Scalia to be the kind of Justices 
he plans to appoint.  The only hope lies in the Democratic Party 
blocking such frightening appointments.  Considering modern history, 
this seems doubtful: with the lone exception of Robert Bork, the 
Donkey Party has failed to deny any of the Reagan-Bush nominees.  In 
fact, Scalia himself was confirmed unanimously, including, fitting 
enough, a vote from Al Gore himself.

In any case, we salute Antonin Scalia as Beast of the Month.  
Congratulations, and keep up the great work, Antonin!!!

Sources:

U.S. Supreme Court: FDA Cannot Regulate Tobacco as Drug
Associated Press, March 21, 2000

Various Articles, The Consortium
http://www.consortiumnews.com 

Supreme Court Rejects Medical Pot
Steven Wishnia, High Times ( http://www.hightimes.com  )
May 15, 2001


The "Gore Exception," Mark Levine
The Konformist ( http://www.konformist.com  )

Down and Dirty: The Plot to Steal the Presidency, Jake Tapper

Bandits in Black Robes, Jamin Raskin
Washington Monthly ( http://www.washingtonmonthly.com  )
March 18, 2001


The Konformist
http://www.konformist.com
Robert Sterling
Post Office Box 24825
Los Angeles, California 90024-0825
Robalini@aol.com 

George Bush an Asshole?
Japan's Foreign Minister Tanaka Makes Inappropriate
Private Remark About Bush

http://www.weeklypost.com/010625/010625b.htm #one


The Weekly Post - June 25 - July 1, 2001

  On June 17, a day before Foreign Minister Makiko Tanaka would be
meeting US Secretary of State Collin Powell, Ms. Tanaka visited German
Town High School in Philadelphia where she studied for two years when
she was a high school student.

  The alumnae of the high school gave Ms. Tanaka a grand welcome. She
enjoyed a class reunion and talking with her old classmates. Ms. Tanaka
did not accompany interpreters and stenographers. She made a remark
about George Bush during her conversation with her classmates and her
words will remain in the history of Japan's foreign ministers.

  When she entered the library, she sat in the same wooden chair she
used when she was a student. She remarked, "I remember the smell of
this
chair. It has not changed at all."

  She was deep in sentimental memories of those days. Makiko Tanaka
said, "What I learned at this school was spiritualism based on
religion, the principles of a simple life and love as well as peace. I
learned how important it is to listen to others and express one's
opinion. I have respected this principle throughout my entire life
thus far."

  Then, one classmate raised a political issue and said to her, "There
is no scientific proof that the earth is warming and no legitimate
reason why we need the 'star wars' missile defense system. Don't you
think so?" Ms. Tanaka appreciated the question.

  In response to that question, Japan's Foreign Minister Makiko
reportedly said, "I will definitely oppose the new missile defense plan
proposed by President Bush. It is beyond my imagination that we
need it"

  Ms. Tanaka's visit to Washington DC was agreed to by the US
government
after strenuous efforts by the Japanese government. The objective of
her
trip was to vindicate what she expressed about US foreign policies at
meetings with her counterparts from other countries. She conveyed her
messages of criticism about the foreign polices of the US government to
them. She must have told them faithfully what she believed. Her address
immediately caused problems in the Japanese political world.

  During the conversation with her old classmates at the reception in
German Town High School, The Weekly Post learned that Ms. Tanaka made a
remark about George Bush, "He is totally an asshole" in English.

  The majority of her classmates seemed to support the Republican
Party,
however, they were critical about Mr. Bush's new missile defense plan.
When Ms. Tanaka made this remark, the classmates in the room were
reportedly excited.

  There has never been a statesman in Japanese history that called a US
president, 'an asshole.'
_________________________    
(c) 2001, The Weekly Post
http://www.weeklypost.com 

Bugliosi and Dershowitz on Good Morning America 7/9/01

Looking Back at Election 2000
Two Attorneys/Authors Review Supreme Court's Role in Presidential
Election 2000



N E W   Y O R K, July 9 — The Supreme Court's decision in Bush vs.
Gore confounded some critics in the field of law. Two of them, Alan
Dershowitz, author of Supreme Injustice and Vincent Bugliosi, author
of The Betrayal of America, tell ABCNEWS' Charlie Gibson what they
think about the Court's handling of the historic case. 




The following is an uncorrected, unedited transcipt of Charles
Gibson's interview with Alan Dershowitz and Vincent Bugliosi on
ABCNEWS' Good Morning America.
ABCNEWS' CHARLES GIBSON: As everyone knows, the Supreme Court's term
recently ended, and it is a term that will always be remembered for
one case, and really one case only, Bush vs. Gore, the case that
decided the American presidency. Two new books compare that decision,
in their words, to a "hijacking" and a "betrayal." Alan Dershowitz,
author of "Supreme Injustice" is joining us here in New York this
morning. And Vincent Bugliosi, author of "The Betrayal of America."
And they both do join us now. I'm trying to think as I looked at
these books of a punch you guys pulled. I don't think there was one
anywhere. You say the court cheated the country, stole the election.
You compare them to white collar criminals. You call them the
felonious five, The majority in this case and you say some acted for
personal gain. That's strong stuff, so back it up.

ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, AUTHOR SUPREME INJUSTICE: First of all, it is an
obligation of lawyers to tell the truth. And many lawyers around the
country are saying what Vince and I are saying. We just published it.
We've had the guts to put it down and prove it. On this show, the
morning after the election, I promised your viewers, that I would not
let go of this because to me this was most outrageous and
disappointing decision and in "Supreme Injustice" I went through 500
opinions of these justices and I proved conclusively that if the shoe
had been on the other foot, if Gore had been ahead by a few hundred
votes and Bush needed the recount, these five justices would have
ruled the other way. That's the most serious accusation you can make
against justices. It violates their oath of office to administer
justice with regard to person. And I prove it by documentary evidence
in this Supreme Injustice.

GIBSON: You say either way they were going to give this to Bush.
Whether Gore had been ahead or whether Bush had been ahead.

DERSHOWITZ: The constant was Bush wins. The variable was the law. And
that's what I prove in Supreme Injustice.

VINCENT BUGLIOSI, AUTHOR THE BETRAYAL OF AMERICA: Well Charlie, a
preferatory remark. I will stake my prosecutorial reputation on the
fact that within the pages of this book, The Betrayal of America,
which is out in trade paperback now. And incidentally, next Sunday
night number four on the New York--on the New York Times best seller
list.

GIBSON: OK, we mentioned the book.

BUGLIOSI: I prove beyond all reasonable doubt that these five
justices deliberately set out to hand the election to George Bush. In
the process they committed one of the biggest and most serious crimes
in American history. And because of what they did in a fair and just
world, they belong behind bars as much as any white collar criminal
who ever lived. I'll just give you some of the evidence. How do you
defend these people when they themselves in so many words confessed
to the crime? Molly Ivans and Gerry Spence were powerful forwards to
the book. Spence is considered to be the leading defense attorney in
the country. How would Spence defend these people when they
themselves, by necessary implication, confessed to the crime? If you
give me 30 seconds, I'll explain how. They confessed to the crime by
saying that their ruling, that different standards to count votes in
Florida violated equal protection clause only applied, they said, to
Bush v. Gore, not to other cases. But if their ruling set forth a
valid legal principle good enough for Bush v. Gore, why wouldn't it
be good enough for other cases? This is the first time, let me finish
…

GIBSON: Right. Yeah.

BUGLIOSI: …this is the first time in the two hundred and ten year
history of the court that the court limited its ruling to the case
before it saying that it did not constitute legal precedent for any
other case. And this fact alone clearly and unequivocally shows that
these five justices were up to no good. That they knew their ruling
was bogus and fraudulent, because let me tell you Charlie, if their
ruling was based on the law there is no reason under the moon why
they would have said that it did not apply to other cases.

GIBSON: But someone--someone had to bring this to an end. We were on
the cusp of Constitutional crises in this country.

DERSHOWITZ: I don't believe that. I don't believe that.

GIBSON: Pragmatism demanded that someone say enough, and someone had
to validate it that way we're going. Otherwise we could have had two
slates of electors in front of the Congress.

DERSHOWITZ: That's exactly what the Constitution intended. Throw it
into the House of Representatives. Scalia, more than anyone would say
the framers of our Constitution had a method for resolving this.
Madison said everybody but the Supreme Court should be involved in
deciding a presidential election. And that's why Vince and I, who,
you know, he's a prosecutor, I'm a defense attorney, we issue a
challenge here today to any two lawyers in America to defend the
Supreme Court. We will but the the Supreme Court on trial. He will
cross-examine, I will do the closing arguments, let people come
forward …

GIBSON: I'd love to do the debate on this air. I think it would be
fascinating.

DERSHOWITZ: … let people--but nobody is coming forward to defend
these people. People are defending them public because they are
currying favor.

GIBSON: You say they stole the election. If it had gone to the House
of Representatives the states there would balance in Republican, the
House was Republican, it would have gone to Bush anyway.

DERSHOWITZ: The issue is not who would have won or lost the election,
the issue is what the Supreme Court did. A hijacking occurs when you
divert the airline, or even if it lands at its intended place. I'm
not, in this book, arguing who would have won the election. In three
years we can undo that. I'm arguing that the institution of the
Supreme court has been forever been tainted by the supreme injustice
that it inflicted on us. We trusted that institution to be above
politics and these five justices acted like five Chicago political
hacks in simply deciding who they wanted to see president.
Manipulating the law, distorting the law and a lot of lawyers are
saying this, they're just not saying it publicly. That's why in
Supreme Injustice and in Vincent's book, we prove the case beyond any
doubt.

BUGLIOSI: Charlie, they showed they were up to good no three days
earlier. December the ninth, Saturday morning 8:00, Bush's lead had
shrunk over Gore's to 154 votes. The recount started. Two o' clock in
the afternoon Scalia steps in with an emergency order, and this is
what he said, I'm not making this up, you can't make up stuff like
this it's just too far out. And he said, `we've got to stop this
recount because if it continues, it could cause, quote: irreputable
harm to George Bush" unquote. So even though the election had not yet
been decided, the unbelievable Scalia was pre-supposing that Bush had
won the election, indeed had a right to win it, and any recount that
showed that Gore had won would cause irreparable harm to George Bush.
Now I want to hypothetically do a reversal of roles. Gore's ahead.
Saturday morning December 9, 8:00 by a 154 votes. Would Scalia have
interviewed? Who is Scalia? He is not a typical conservative
Republican, he's a right wing ideologue of the Rush Limbaugh school.
It is absolutely inconceivable that Scalia would have stepped in and
said, listen to this now, and said we've got to stop this recount
because if it continues it could cause irreparable harm to Al Gore.
That would not have happened. that could not have happened, and
anyone who can tell me with a straight look on their face that Scalia
would have done for Gore what he did for Bush, I will personally
nominate that person for an Academy Award. And I want to say this...

GIBSON: But now …

BUGLIOSI: … and I want to make this point here because lawyers are
buying in to what Al and I are saying. A national legal organization
has written me a letter, I've since talked to them, that they're
going to be using--thinking of using The Betrayal of America as a
legal …

GIBSON: All right

BUGLIOSI: … as a legal basis, let me say, as a legal basis to ask the
House Judiciary Committee to initiate impeachment proceedings against
these five justices.

GIBSON: Mr. Dershowitz, final word.

DERSHOWITZ: I disagree. I disagree. I don't agree with impeachment.
Impeachment just like in the Clinton case requires high crimes and
misdemeanors, Supreme Injustice I proved they acted corruptly not
criminally.

GIBSON: How? All right.

DERSHOWITZ: And I prove it by demonstrating that they were
inconsistent with their prior opinions.

BUGLIOSI: I disagree with Alan on that. I disagree. I say they're
criminals and belong behind bars and they should be impeached. They
should be impeached.

DERSHOWITZ: Read both of our books and decide for yourselves.

GIBSON: Strong stuff. We'll be back. Thank you both for being here.

    WHEN SPIDERS UNITE, THEY CAN TIE DOWN A LION  -- Ethiopian Proverb

Return to top of page

Click Book to Read on Line

Please visit this great web site with it's wonderful article "Brainwashing America"

Revised: July 18, 2010 .   Communication:   discoverer73(at symbol)hotmail.com     Go to Home Page     Go to Index of All Articles Pages       
Read the Disclaimer
Last modified: July 18, 2010  Copyright © 1999 - 2008  All rights reserved. [Gnostic Liberation Front].   www.gnosticliberationfront.com