THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
A birds-eye look at who’s protecting YOUR nest!
Sightings from The Catbird Seat
~ o ~
Official Website
THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
* * * * *
The Catbird’s New Nest
* * * * *
May 1, 2009
Prosecutors to Drop Charges Against Two Former AIPAC Lobbyists
By Jerry Markon, Washington Post Staff Writer
The U.S. government is abandoning espionage-law charges against two former lobbyists for a pro-Israel advocacy group, federal officials announced this morning.
Prosecutors said they will ask a judge to dismiss the case against Steven J. Rosen and Keith Weissman because a series of court decisions had made it unlikely they would win convictions. The two are former lobbyists for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, an influential advocacy group.
Rosen and Weissman were charged in 2005 with conspiring to obtain classified information and pass it to journalists and the Israeli government. They were the first non-government civilians charged under the 1917 espionage statute with verbally receiving and transmitting national defense information. Some lawyers and First Amendment advocates have said the case would criminalize the type of information exchange that is common among journalists, lobbyists and think-tank analysts.
Dana J. Boente, the acting U.S. Attorney in Alexandria, said this morning that prosecutors were abandoning the case because of "the diminished likelihood the government will prevail at trial under the additional intent requirements imposed by the court and the inevitable disclosure of classified information that would occur at any trial.'' Prosecutors have filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, which must be approved by a federal judge.
* * * * *
Catbird Comment: In other words, it’s alright for espionage agents to illegally obtain and pass along top secret information involving national security to foreign governments, journalists and lobbyists, but we don’t want that classified information to fall into the hands of the general public?
* * * * *
Baruch Weiss, a lawyer for Weissman, said that the two former lobbyists "are innocent, and it's been clear to us from outset that we would ultimately prevail.'' He said defense lawyers "were able to put together an array of experts to demonstrate to the government that the information" the men were accused of passing along was "innocuous.''
The decision is a stunning vindication for the former lobbyists, who were accused of providing information about topics that included the activities of al-Qaeda and possible attacks on U.S. forces in Iraq. Rosen, of Silver Spring, was AIPAC's director of foreign policy issues and was instrumental in making the committee a formidable political force. Weissman, of Bethesda, was a senior analyst. AIPAC fired them in 2005.
The trial had been set for June 2 in U.S. District Court in Alexandria. But recent pre-trial rulings had made the case difficult for the government. Those decisions included an appeals court ruling that allowed the defense to use classified information at trial. A lower-court judge also said prosecutors must show that the two men knew that the information they allegedly disclosed would harm the United States -- a high burden for prosecutors.
* * * * *
Chicken-hawk Comment: Why don’t we just put these two spies in a secret CIA prison camp and waterboard ‘em until they confess? No need for lawyers or judges! No need for a trial! No need to divulge secret classified information to U.S. citizens! No need to expose our duly-elected politicians, highly-paid lobbyists, corporate heads and attorneys to the possibility of being prosecuted and held accountable for corruption, espionage and terrorism! No need to hurt our national economy any worse than it is by hampering the lucrative selling of state secrets and military arms to foreign countries! No need to put the fear of prosecution or punishment into these politicians and political patrons! God forbid ... that’s today’s American Way!
* * * * *
Boente cited "the additional intent requirements imposed by the court" in his statement this morning. "When this indictment was brought," he said, "the government believed it could prove this case beyond a reasonable doubt based on the statute. However, as the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit noted, the District Court potentially imposed an additional burden on the prosecution not mandated by statute."
The AIPAC case has always been controversial, and it came to public attention again with the recent disclosure that a prominent House lawmaker, Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif), had been recorded in 2006 on FBI wiretaps allegedly offering to use her influence on behalf of Rosen and Weissman.
Harman strongly denied the allegations and accused the government of an "abuse of power" in wiretapping her conversations. Law enforcement sources have said the review of the case was triggered by the recent court rulings and was unrelated to the revelations about Harman.
If the high-profile trial had gone forward, it was expected to feature testimony from a number of senior Bush administration officials, including former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice, former national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley, and former high-level Defense Department officials Paul D. Wolfowitz and Douglas J. Feith.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/01/AR2009050101310_pf.html
* * * * *
SECRETS FROM THE CATBIRD’S NEST!
(S-h-h-h ... don’t tell anybody)
* * * * *
April 30, 2009
How about helping "FREE" Lt. Shine, USNR - USMMRR??
From: "Eric Shine" <uploadinthezone@gmail.com>
To: Bobby N. Harmon
Bobby,
How about helping "free" Lt. Shine who remains to be a "political prisoner" of the "Coast Guard" and "Homeland Security" to where a "SPECIAL BRANCH OF MILITARY" that he is not in - has declared him to be "medically/ mentally incompetent"??
Please review the incoming emails as forwarded to you as sent to Thu Trang.
in addition please visit the Coast Guards' website "HOMEPORT" at www.uscg.mil and go to "administrative adjudications" for the year 2008 and find the "SHINE" decision that is now on appeal to the COAST GUARD COMMANDANT as the head of a Special Branch of Military that Lt. Shine as a Naval Officer is not in nor ever served within.
Lt. Shine is in and remains to be in deep trouble and cannot extricate himself from this situation and needs help to defend himself against a Rogue Agency.
Please search the internet for information pertaining to Lt. Shine including various videos and get the word out about the Coast Guard.
Thank you.
~ ~ ~
Fwd: Contact regarding presentation....
Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:54 PM
From: "Eric Shine" <uploadinthezone@gmail.com>
To: Bobby N. Harmon
As forwarded - please read and act asap....
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Eric Shine <uploadinthezone@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:22 PM
Subject: Contact regarding presentation....
Thu Trang,
Thank you for the presentation with Peter Thottam.
I spoke with you briefly about doing a presentation on MILITARY TRIBUNALS that are now being used in the United States today.
My name is Lt. Eric Shine and I am a Naval Officer and graduate of the United States Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point in New York. Kings Point is a fellow military and federal service academy to West Point, Annapolis, and the Air Force Academy.
You can google my name "Lt. Eric Shine" and search it individually or add in terms like "whistle blower"; "merchant marine"; "federal officer" and obtain varying results.
I used to have a Radio Program on GCN where Alex Jones is at, but have most recently moved back to Republic Broadcasting Network at www.republicbroadcasting.org
I would love to do a presentation, and try and couple it with several others who are out there speaking out and about what is going on.
My Radio and TV programs are called "IN THE ZONE" and cover everything going on right now and touch upon some of the things that Peter spoke about, but from a different persective as to the issues of ROYALTY and "KINGDOMS" and "FREE REPUBLICS" which is the core issue to everything we are dealing with.
The COAST GUARD moved into Homeland Security on March 01, 2003, on March 06, 2003 charges were brought against me by Homeland Security and the Coast Guard and about two weeks later the war in Iraq was launched on March 18th, 2003. The Coast Guard as a self-declared "special" Branch of Military that now resides within Homeland Security rather then the Department of Defense and has moved MILITARY LAW/ UCMJ/ TITLE 10 into DHS out of DoD is not prosecuting civilians under military authority. The Coast Guard has been proseucting me for the past 6 years not as a valid NAVAL OFFICER, but as an "alleged" [identified by them] civilian.
The ties to GERMANY in all that is going on, and coming from the Habsburgs and other German Royal familes is the core issue in all of this. Names like Lichtenstein, Hochstetler, Nassen, Goss, Feinstein [yes the Senator], Kosinkski, Brudzynski, Bush, Axelrod and others have been directly or indirectly involved in my own situation.
I just appeared at WHITTIER PEACE GROUP a few weeks ago and the video will be out soon, but there are a great number of other videos on the internet that I have done and been doing to explain just what is going on if you do a quick search with my name and add in "video."
I would like to do a presentation and organize one with your help.
I appreciate your approach in the ANTI-RECRUITING campaign as it is more playing the "devil's advocate" in attempting to inform and to make sure that anyone and everyone going into the Military understand just what they are signing up for. With that said we cannot allow just degenerates to be recruited in the shortfall and we need good quality people to join, enlist and go to the Academies but be taught up front how to say "NO" when confronted with criminal activity whether it be torture or war profiteering or anything else along those lines.
People within the system with strong ethics, integrity, honesty, a good understanding of the Constitution, some level of a moral compass no matter what part of the world that compass may have come from and other characteristics where a simple "NO" can go so much further then millions of people in the streets. You would be surprised that there are a lot of good people who wish to "serve" their country, and many who will anyways - but keying in on those people to educate them that they must believe and be willing to enforce that when the join the military or other State or Federal Service that the Constitution and rule of law is not thrown out the window.
Contact me if you are interested.
Lt. Eric N. Shine
April 13, 2009
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL, USA
Ask Secretary Clinton Why the US Continues to Deliver Arms to Israel
Despite strong evidence of the misuse of U.S. weapons against civilians in Gaza, Amnesty International recently revealed that the United States sent a massive new shipment of arms to Israel. The Wehr Elbe, a ship controlled by the U.S. Military Sealift Command, docked and unloaded several thousand tons of arms on March 22 at the Israeli port of Ashdod. Ask State Department officials why the United States would deliver these arms to Israel.
http://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/siteapps/advocacy/ActionItem.aspx?c=jhKPIXPCIoE&b=2590179&aid=11787
March 1, 2008
Airbus parent beats Boeing for
big U.S. Air Force contract
By Leslie Wayne, International Herald Tribune
WASHINGTON: The U.S. Air Force, in a stunning decision against Boeing, awarded a $40 billion contract for aerial refueling tankers Friday to a partnership between Northrop Grumman and the European parent of Airbus, putting a critical military contract partly into the hands of a foreign company.
The contract, one of the largest at the Pentagon, has the potential to grow to $100 billion. It is also a sign of the growing influence of foreign suppliers within the Pentagon and breaks a decades-long relationship with Boeing, which built the bulk of the existing tanker fleet and fought hard to land the new contract.
"This isn't an upset," said Loren Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, a Washington-area research group. "It's an earthquake."
Under the contract, Northrop and the parent of Airbus, European Aeronautic Defense & Space, or EADS, would build a fleet of 179 planes, based on the existing Airbus 330, to provide in-air refueling to military aircraft, from fighter jets to cargo planes. It gives a huge lift to EADS, whose commercial aviation program has suffered a number of setbacks in recent years.
While final assembly of the craft would take place at an Airbus plant near Mobile, Alabama, parts would come from suppliers across the globe.
At a news conference, air force officials said the creation of domestic jobs was not a factor in the decision. In response to questions about possible negative reaction to the deal in Congress, General Arthur Lichte, head of the air force's air mobility command, said, "This will be an American tanker, flown by American airmen with an American flag on its tail and, every day, it will be saving American lives."
Reaction from some in Congress, however, was swift.
"We are outraged that this decision taps European Airbus and its foreign workers to provide a tanker to our American military," the delegation from Washington State said in a joint statement. Boeing planes are assembled outside Seattle. "This is a blow to the American aerospace industry, American workers and America's men and women in uniform."
For its part, Boeing, which had been considered the strong favorite to retain the contract, said it was "very disappointed" in the outcome. But it did not say whether it would file a formal protest - something General Michael Moseley, chief of staff of the air force, has said he hopes the losing bidder will not do because it would only further delay the tanker replacement program.
In its statement, Boeing said, "We believe that we offered the air force the best value and lowest risk tanker for its mission." The company added that only after a debriefing by the Pentagon would the company "make a decision concerning our possible options, keeping in mind at all times the impact to the warfighter and the nation."
A Boeing victory was considered so certain that many Wall Street analysts had already factored the contract into their economic forecasts for the company and led one senator, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas, to prematurely send out a press release praising Boeing for its victory.
The air force decision is also a surprise ending to a protracted contracting process that went on for nearly a decade and became mired in scandal and international politics. Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential candidate, had scuttled an earlier attempt by the air force to award the contract to Boeing, opening the door for the Northrop-Airbus bid.
McCain's campaign spokeswoman referred calls to his Senate office, which could not be reached for comment.
Norm Dicks, a Washington Democrat who is a member of the House Appropriations Committee Defense Subcommittee, said he was attending an anticipated victory party at Boeing's Washington headquarters when the mood suddenly darkened.
"Here we are in the middle of a recession and we give this to Airbus?" Dicks added. "That is not going to go down well."
Ronald Sugar, the chief executive of Northrop Grumman, said in a telephone interview that he expected members of Congress would have a "variety of views" depending on whether their districts would be gaining or losing jobs under the deal.
He said that 60 percent of the content of the new tanker would come from the United States and that the contract would create 2,000 jobs in Mobile and 25,000 overall in the United States.
"This is more about the capability that we will give to the kids fighting the wars and the cost to the taxpayer," he said.
Backing Sugar's view was Senator Richard Shelby, Republican of Alabama, who hailed the decision as "great news for Alabama."
The Alabama and Mississippi delegations had lobbied hard in Congress to polish the image of Airbus. In Paris, at the annual air shows, Airbus officials and these politicians proudly displayed the proposed European tanker offering and made the argument that if the United States wanted to sell its weapons to European countries, it should also open its doors to foreign suppliers....
Replacing these tankers has been the air force's top priority since 1996, when the government first proposed obtaining new planes. The first 179 tankers will be acquired at a pace of about 15 a year. But it is expected that, over time, nearly 400 new refueling planes will be needed, which could bring the program's total cost to $100 billion.
For more than a decade the air force's effort to modernize the fleet has been thwarted by global politics, Washington scandals and an aggressive attack by McCain, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
In the end, a procurement scandal led to the departure of Philip Condit, the chief executive of Boeing, the resignation of James Roche as air force secretary and the imprisonment of two Boeing executives, one of whom had worked on the program as a Pentagon acquisition official.
The air force, short on cash and wanting to acquire the planes as fast as possible, proposed an arrangement to Congress in late 2001 under which the Pentagon would lease the Boeing 767s in a sole-source contract that would keep Boeing's aging 767 production line alive.
But just as the air force was about to sign that deal, it came under sharp attack from McCain, a former navy pilot. He denounced the deal as a sweetheart arrangement between Boeing and the air force that had been arranged with insufficient scrutiny and oversight, and that would shortchange the taxpayer.
Soon afterward, it was reported that the air force's No. 2 weapons buyer, Darleen Druyun, had been promised jobs for herself, her daughter and son-in-law in return for steering the tanker contract and billions of dollars of other air force business to Boeing. Soon after joining the company in a $250,000-a-year post, Druyun and Michael Sears, Boeing's former chief financial officer, pleaded guilty and received prison terms.
The weight of the scandal caused the deal to collapse in 2004 and opened the door to competition.
Each side spent millions to sharpen its proposal, hire lobbyists and former generals to argue their case and wage extensive advertising efforts in Washington and at military gatherings.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/03/01/business/eads.php
March 6, 2008
Move to restrict EADS’
foreign ownership
The Financial Times, Limited
By Gerrit Wiesmann in Frankfurt and Peggy Hollinger in Paris
France and Germany are finalising changes to EADS’ corporate by-laws to prevent foreign investors building significant stakes in – or even taking over – Europe’s flagship aerospace and defence company.
The move comes at a sensitive time for the Franco-German group, which late last week secured a breathtaking entry into the US defence market with a $35bn contract for its Airbus tanker-aircraft.
Some US politicians have said giving the contract to a foreign company could have dire security implications – a frenzy that could mount if EADS’ Russian or Middle Eastern shareholders were to increase their holdings.
Dubai International Capital, a sovereign wealth fund, bought 3.1 per cent last summer and VEB, a state-controlled Russian bank, took a 5 per cent stake in December.
But the French government, French media group Lagardère, and German carmaker Daimler, which together control 45 per cent of EADS, are planning to restrict any investor deemed predatory from owning more than 15 per cent.
That level – a working number that might change – is integral to two models the Franco-German core shareholders are working on to see whether EADS can be given additional protection against a foreign takeover.
This follows last summer’s agreement between Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, and Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, to consider issuing “golden shares” to Paris and Berlin to take pressure off the core trio to uphold their stakes.
New takeover defences could herald adjustments to the shareholders’ pact, which enshrines German and French stakes at 22.5 per cent a piece. Lagardère has been seen as a probable seller of its 7.5 per cent stake....
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5fc7f6a2-ebbb-11dc-9493-0000779fd2ac.html
March 11, 2008
McCain advisers lobbied for
European plane maker
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Top current advisers to Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign last year lobbied for a European plane maker that beat Boeing to a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract, taking sides in a bidding fight that McCain has tried to referee for more than five years.
Two of the advisers gave up their lobbying work when they joined McCain's campaign. A third, former Texas Rep. Tom Loeffler, lobbied for the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co. while serving as McCain's national finance chairman.
EADS is the parent company of Airbus, which teamed up with U.S.-based Northrop Grumman Corp. to win the lucrative aerial refueling contract on February 29. Boeing Co. Chairman and CEO Jim McNerney said in a statement Monday that the Chicago-based aerospace company "found serious flaws in the process that we believe warrant appeal."
McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in waiting, has been a key figure in the Pentagon's years-long attempt to complete a deal on the tanker. McCain helped block an earlier tanker contract with Boeing and prodded the Pentagon in 2006 to develop bidding procedures that did not exclude Airbus.
EADS retained Ogilvy Government Relations and The Loeffler Group to lobby for the tanker deal last year, months after McCain sent two letters urging the Defense Department to make sure the bidding proposals guaranteed competition.
"They never lobbied him related to the issues, and the letters went out before they were contracted" by EADS, McCain campaign spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said Monday.
According to lobbying records filed with the Senate, Loeffler Group lobbyists on the project included Loeffler and Susan Nelson, who left the firm and is now the campaign's finance director. Ogilvy lobbyist John Green, who was assigned the EADS work, recently took a leave of absence to volunteer for McCain as the campaign's congressional liaison.
"The aesthetics are not good, especially since he is an advocate of reform and transparency," said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the aerospace consulting firm Teal Group. "Boeing advocates are going to use this as ammunition."
McCain, a longtime critic of influence peddling and special interest politics, has come under increased scrutiny as a presidential candidate, particularly because he has surrounded himself with advisers who are veteran Washington lobbyists. He has defended his inner circle and has emphatically denied reports last month in The New York Times and The Washington Post that suggested he helped the client of a lobbyist friend nine years ago.
He has also cast himself as a neutral watchdog in the Air Force tanker contract, one of the largest in decades.
"All I asked for in this situation was a fair competition," he told reporters Monday at Lambert Field in St. Louis, home of a Boeing fighter jet plant.
On Friday, he defended his aggressive oversight: "I never weighed in for or against anybody that competed for the contract. All I asked for was a fair process. And the facts are that I never showed any bias in any way against anybody -- except for the taxpayer."
Last week, Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the EADS-Northrop Gruman plane was "clearly a better performer" than the one proposed by Boeing.
It is unclear what EADS hired the lobbyists to do. Loeffler and Airbus officials did not immediately respond to phone and e-mail messages left late Monday.
A Boeing spokesman declined to comment Monday on the links between McCain and lobbying efforts on behalf of EADS.
But Boeing supporters already have begun to accuse McCain of damaging Boeing's chances by inserting himself into the tanker deal.
One of them, Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Washington, said the field was "tilted to Airbus" because the Pentagon did not weigh European subsidies for Airbus in its deliberations -- a decision he blamed on McCain. Everett, Wash., is where Boeing would perform much of the tanker work, and Dicks is a senior member of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.
In December 2006, just weeks before the Air Force was set to release its formal request for proposals, McCain wrote a letter to the incoming defense secretary, Robert Gates, warning that he was "troubled" by the Air Force's draft request for bids.
The United States had filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization alleging that Airbus unfairly benefits from European subsidies. Airbus in turn argued that Boeing also receives government support, mostly as tax breaks.
Under the Air Force proposal, bidders would have been required to explain how financial penalties or other sanctions stemming from the subsidy dispute might affect their ability to execute the contract. The request was widely viewed as hurting the EADS-Northrop Grumman bid.
The proposed bid request "may risk eliminating competition before bids are submitted," McCain wrote in a December 1, 2006, letter to Gates. The Air Force changed the criteria four days later.
Dicks said the removal of the subsidy language was a "game-changer" that favored EADS over Boeing.
"The only reason that they could even bid a low price is because they received a subsidy," Dicks said last week. "And Senator McCain jumped into this and said that (the Air Force) could not look at the subsidy issue -- which I think is a big mistake, especially when the U.S. trade representative is bringing a case in the (World Trade Organization) on this very issue."
EADS' interest in the tanker deal is evident in the political contributions of its employees. From 2004 to 2006, donations by its employees jumped from $42,500 to $141,931, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. So far this election cycle, company employees have donated $120,350. Of that, McCain's presidential campaign has received $14,000, the most of any other member of Congress this election cycle.
McCain prides himself in the role he played blocking an earlier version of the tanker deal that gave the contract to Boeing. As chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee and of an Armed Services subcommittee, McCain led an investigation that eventually helped kill that contract in 2004. A former Air Force official and a top Boeing executive both served time in prison, and the scandal led to the departure of Boeing's chief executive and several top Air Force officials.
"I intervened in a process that was clearly corrupt," McCain said Friday. "That's why people went to jail."
While McCain has praised Boeing for fixing its practices, his campaign said the experience prompted him to demand "a full, fair and open competition." His letters -- one to Deputy Defense Secretary Gordon England in September 2006 and the other to Gates -- were sent with that spirit in mind, Hazelbaker said Monday.
Once the rules were in place, Hazelbaker said, bidders submitted proposals, the Air Force reviewed them and the contract was awarded.
"That is a process that McCain, appropriately, had absolutely no role in," she said.
www.kycbs.net/McCain-Airbus-Lobby.mht
Date Posted: 04/16/07 Mon
Author: Eric Shine
Subject: TO ALL CONCERNED CITIZENS...
To all Concerned Citizens,
You may or may not have heard of my current, if not long term plight and fight for my life.
It may be hard to understand - or get around the legal and underlying whistle blower matters - but the most important point is that I am in deep trouble and need help badly.
My name is Lt. Eric N. Shine - USNR - MMRRI a graduate of the United States Merchant Marine Academy - a sister Academy to West Point and Annapolis.
I have been held and detained "under the gun" so to speak and have been taking on "friendly fire" under false flag proceedings carried out against me over the past 4 years or longer by HOMELAND SECURITY so as to step upon my underlying complaints. This in and of itself is an enormous program of waste, fraud, abuse and gross mismanagment in and of itself, barring all other surrounding matters and concerns.
I have been charged, and am, and have been being "prosecuted" aggressively by the "United States" for the past 4 years for "being depressed." There is much, much more to all of this - but I will not get into it now as there is a more urgent matter at hand.
It is difficult to convey to you just what has transpired or what I have been put through - all I can say that it is and has been and continues to be extremely tortuous for me to put it lightly. This is the general intention of these proceedings - torture.
This is part of a program called LEGAL WARFARE or LAWFARE that is being targeted at Federal Officers and personnel and even now Citizens to use a new Pentagon Program to change the law and Constitution on its face by using "Defense" dollars to protect and defend and attack any and all grievants, complainants, whistle blowers and others who speak the truth about what is going on right now. This goes well beyond the DoD Programs of paying journalists like Armstrong Willams and others to publish propoganda.
Beyond all that I am forced to represent myself beginning tomorrow once again within these proceedings brought against me by Homeland Security even though the United States wishes to prove that I am "medically/ mentally incompetent" and do so from under extreme duress and tortuous violations of due process and protections.
The USCG Commandant has recently vacated the previous Order filed against me that was done absent any and all hearings or evidence in early 2004 - only to try and point and focus the matters somehow back on the death of my father in 2001 even now.
I need help badly in the form of LEGAL AID and a LEGAL AID DEFENSE FUND and other such provisions as this is gravely serious and do not know how much more of these unlawful and cruel and unusual proceedings that I can withstand - especially on my own.
The very nature of these proceedings sounds odd if not clearly abnormal - because they are being used to try and place me in an early grave from overt and intentional oppression and deprivation of due process and other such legal rights and remedies. Homeland Security has seized medical records, falsified them and entered them in these proceedings and continuously blocked me from any and all proper due process hearings in this regard.
I am trapped in a false flag proceeding that I cannot get myself out of - nor can I somehow lift myself up from - by my own bootstraps. I cannot and will not survive much more of this unless I get immediate help and assistance from people like you.
I need help, minimally, in getting and staying visible.
Please do what you can to try and rally a substantial number of the people to help one of those who has gone to extreme lengths to help defend you, the Nation and most importantly the Declaration of Independence, Constitution, Bill of Rights and rule of law.
You may not understand the matters at hand, but I do - with my training and experience and have attempted to confront what is going on within the Court systems only to have those involved in war profiteering and privateering use the system to come after me.
Please take this request seriously and be moved to act quickly.
Thanking you in advance for any and all considerations in this and all other regards.
I'd not ask this if there were anyway I could confront or withstand all of this on my own. The "United States" is trying to use overwhelming force to oppress and further injure me.
Peace!
Thank You
Lt. Eric N. Shine
USNR - MMRRI - Kings Point - 1991
714-362-7491
For more, GO TO > > > The Torch of Eric Shine
February 26, 2006
Homeland Security Protested
Ports Deal
By TED BRIDIS, Associated Press, Yahoo! News
The Homeland Security Department objected at first to a United Arab Emirates company's taking over significant operations at six U.S. ports. It was the lone protest among members of the government committee that eventually approved the deal without dissent.
The department's early objections were settled later in the government's review of the $6.8 billion deal after Dubai-owned DP World agreed to a series of security restrictions.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and other congressional leaders, the company and Bush administration officials were working on a compromise intended to derail plans by Republicans and Democrats for legislation next week that would force a new investigation of security issues relating to the deal....
"My comfort level is good, but I have 99 other United States senators who need the opportunity to ask their questions," Frist told the Lexington Herald-Leader before speaking at a Republican dinner Saturday evening in Lexington, Ky.
"We're behind the president 100 percent," he added. "We believe the decision in all likelihood is absolutely the right one."
Under one proposal being discussed, DP World would seek new approval of the deal from the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, given the company's surprise decision Thursday to indefinitely postpone its takeover of U.S. port operations. Other proposals included a new, intensive 45-day review of the deal by the government — something the White House had refused to consider as recently as Friday.
Rep. Peter King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said discussions among congressional leaders centered on that issue. "It's my understanding that they are trying to build support for a deal involving a new 45-day investigation," he said.
Frist, R-Tenn., said that while legislation may not be necessary now, having "30 to 45 days" to step back and evaluate the deal still could be necessary.
"If there's some question about the diagnosis, then maybe we need to get a second opinion," said Frist, a former heart surgeon.
King, R-N.Y., said he would need to see all the details of a compromise before deciding if it met all of his concerns, or met the demands of the legislation he planned to offer.
Despite persistent criticism from Republicans and Democrats, the president has defended his administration's approval of the ports deal and threatened to veto any measures in Congress that would block it. The company's voluntary delay in taking over most operations at the six U.S. ports did little to quell a political furor or appease skeptical members of Congress that the deal does not pose any increased risks to the U.S. from terrorism. Republican House and Senate leaders are to meet Tuesday to discuss how to proceed....
A DP World executive said the company would agree to tougher security restrictions to win congressional support only if the same restrictions applied to all U.S. port operators. The company earlier had struck a more conciliatory stance, saying it would do whatever Bush asked to salvage the agreement.
"Security is everybody's business," senior vice president Michael Moore told The Associated Press. "We're going to have a very open mind to legitimate concerns. But anything we can do, any way to improve security, should apply to everybody equally."
The administration approved the ports deal on Jan. 17 after DP World agreed during secret negotiations to cooperate with law enforcement investigations in the future and make other concessions.
Some lawmakers have challenged the adequacy of a classified intelligence assessment crucial to assuring the administration that the deal was proper. The report was assembled during four weeks in November by analysts working for the director of national intelligence.
The report concluded that U.S. spy agencies were "unable to locate any derogatory information on the company," according to a person familiar with the document. This person spoke only on condition of anonymity because the report was classified.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and others have complained that the intelligence report focused only on information the agencies collected about DP World and did not examine reported links between UAE government officials and al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden before the Sept. 11 attacks.
The uproar over DP World has exposed how the government routinely approves deals involving national security without the input of senior administration officials or Congress.
President Bush, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and even Treasury Secretary John Snow, who oversees the government committee that approved the deal, all say they did not know about the purchase until after it was finalized. The work was done mostly by assistant secretaries.
Snow now says he may consider changes in the approval process so lawmakers are better alerted after such deals get the go-ahead.
Stewart Baker, a senior Homeland Security official, said he was the sole representative on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States who objected to the ports deal. Baker said he later changed his vote after DP World agreed to the security conditions. Other officials confirmed Baker's account.
"We were not prepared to sign off on the deal without the successful negotiation of the assurances," Baker told the AP.
Officials from the White House, CIA, departments of State, Treasury, Justices, and others looked for guidance from Homeland Security because it is responsible for seaports. "We had the most obvious stake in the process," Baker said.
Baker acknowledged that a government audit of security practices at the U.S. ports in the takeover has not been completed as part of the deal. "We had the authority to do an audit earlier," Baker said.
The audit will help evaluate DP World's security programs to stop smuggling and detect illegal shipments of nuclear materials at its seaport operations in New York, New Jersey, Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami and Philadelphia.
The administration privately disclosed the status of the security audit to senators during meetings about improving reviews of future business deals involving foreign buyers. Officials did not suggest the audit's earlier completion would have affected the deal's approval.
New Jersey's Democratic governor, who is suing to block the deal, said in his party's weekly radio address on Saturday that the administration failed to properly investigate the UAE's record on terrorism.
"We were told that the president didn't know about the sale until after it was approved. For many Americans, regardless of party, this lack of disciplined review is unacceptable," Jon Corzine said....
Bush's national security adviser, Stephen Hadley, said there was no going back on the deal.
February 20, 2006
P&O confident of Dubai takeover
P&O has said it is confident its takeover by
Dubai Ports World will go ahead despite
mounting opposition in the US.
BBC News
Several US senators have warned they will oppose the $6.8bn (£3.9bn) deal over "national security concerns".
P&O controls six major ports in the US, including New York and Miami.
Meanwhile, a company based in the port of Miami has begun court action to prevent the takeover by DP World, which is backed by the Dubai government.
President Bush's administration has given its backing to the deal, which was agreed by the two firms last week, and has resisted calls from Congress to reconsider its stance.
Security worries
But lawmakers from both the Democratic and Republican parties have questioned the takeover, and at least one Senate oversight hearing is planned for later this month.
Over the weekend, opponents of the deal voiced their concerns about whether security would be compromised by allowing a firm backed by a member of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) to takeover major US port operations.
The chairman of the House of Representatives Homeland Security Committee, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, has called for an immediate freeze on the deal and demanded a "full and thorough investigation" of the sale.
He also dubbed the government's support of the deal "politically tone deaf".
Senator Chuck Schumer said: "The question that needs to be answered is whether or not they (Dubai) can be trusted to operate our ports in this post 9-11 world."
Assurances in place
But the US Government dismissed the concerns, saying it had given the deal a thorough review and had implemented the "appropriate" conditions and safeguards where necessary.
"We make sure there are assurances in place, in general, sufficient to satisfy us that the deal is appropriate from a national security standpoint," Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff told ABC television.
However, he declined to give further details saying the information was classified.
DP World also shrugged off the claims saying security was "at the forefront" of its business.
Meanwhile P&O has insisted it has cleared all the correct regulatory channels after a partner in Miami filed a lawsuit to block the deal.
Eller & Company subsidiary Continental Stevedoring & Terminals launched the action late on Friday, saying that the sale was prohibited under its current agreement with P&O.
It argued that under the terms of sale it became an "involuntary partner" with Dubai and it may seek damages of $10m.
The takeover of P&O will make DP World one of the three largest container ports businesses in the world when it is finalised on 2 March.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/business/4731560.stm
January 24, 2006
DP WORLD EXECUTIVE NOMINATED FOR PRESITIGOUS US GOVT POSITION
Dubai - Global ports operator DP World today welcomed news that one of its senior executives, Dave Sanborn, has been nominated by US President George W. Bush to serve as Maritime Administrator - a key transportation appointment reporting directly to Norman Mineta the Secretary of Transportation and Cabinet Member.
The White House has issued a statement from Washington DC announcing the nomination. The confirmation process will begin in February.
Mr Sanborn currently holds the position of Director of Operations for Europe and Latin America for the Dubai-based company
Mohammed Sharaf, CEO, DP World said:
“While we are sorry to lose such an experienced and capable executive, it is exactly those qualities that will make Dave an effective administrator for MarAd. We are proud of Dave’s selection and pleased that the Bush Administration found such a capable executive. We wish him all the best in his new role.”
Ted Bilkey, Chief Operating Officer, DP World said:
“Dave’s decades of experience in markets around the world, together with his passion for the industry and commitment to its development, will allow him to make a positive contribution to the work of the Maritime Administration. We wish him well for the future.”
Mr Sanborn, a graduate of The United States Merchant Maritime Academy, joined DP World in 2005. He previously held senior roles with shipping lines CMA-CGM (Americas), APL Ltd and Sea-Land and has been based, besides the US, in Brazil, Europe, Hong Kong and Dubai during his career. He has also served in the US Naval Reserve.
Mr Sanborn is due to take up his new role based in Washington DC later in 2006.
www.dpiterminals.com/fullnews.asp?NewsID=39
~ ~ ~
For more poop on Dubya and Dubai, GO TO > > >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubai#History
http://corpwatch.org/article.php?id=13322
~ ~ ~
For more poop on Norman Mineta, GO TO > > > Hail To The Chief; The Eagle Awakes; The Eagle Hooded; Tarnished Wings: Graft and Greed at Lockheed Martin; The Torch of Eric Shine; Who’s Guarding the Hen House?; Year of the Dragon; Woo vs. Harmon: Witness Norman Mineta
~ ~ ~
For more poop on the takeover of the world, GO TO > > > APCOA: Vultures in the Parking Lot; BCCI: The Bank of Crooks & Criminals; Dirty Gold in Goldman Sachs; The Carlyle Group: Birds That Drink From Cesspools; Investigating Investcorp; Nests In The Pentagon; The Eagle Hooded: The 9-11 Coverup; The Kissinger of Death; The Nature Conservancy; Thorns in The Rose Garden; Vampires in the City
From The International Relations Center:
MICHAEL CHERTOFF
Michael Chertoff, a rabbi’s son from northern New Jersey, is widely respected for his razor-sharp mind and fearsome courtroom demeanor. While at Harvard Law School, he was a classmate of Scott Turow, whose semi-fictional memoir about law school, One L, was based in part on his memories of Chertoff’s brutal yet incisive manner of legal argument.
A political partisan, Chertoff became special counsel to the Whitewater Commission established in 1994 by the Republican-led Congress to investigate the involvement of Bill and Hillary Clinton in real estate deals in Arkansas and other business deals. Now widely regarded as a political witch hunt spearheaded by Sen. Alfonse D’Amato (R-NY) and Independent Counselor Kenneth Starr, the Whitewater Commission spent $40 million on the investigation, which ultimately failed to find that the Clintons had done anything illegal.
Chertoff is a longtime member and activist in the Federalist Society. This national association of right-wing lawyers and judicial reform activists is dedicated to realigning the country’s legal system to reflect a more conservative interpretation of the Constitution.
The Federalist Society, which since its founding in 1982 has been closely linked to the neoconservative political camp, aims to rid the system of liberal judges and stamp out what it sees are its overly egalitarian and secular impulses. Many association members believe that the Constitution and the country’s laws should primarily serve to ensure order and social orthodoxy rather than democracy and human rights.
As U.S. Attorney General in New Jersey, appointed by President George H.W. Bush in 1990, Chertoff gained a reputation as a political attack dog for the Republican Party. Leveraging his strong political base in New Jersey, Chertoff served as financial vice chair for Bush’s 2000 campaign in the Garden State. (2)
Chertoff was Bush’s second nominee to head Homeland Security, following the failed nomination of former New York City Police Chief Bernie Kerik, who admitted that he neglected to pay taxes for the “illegal immigrant” nanny he employed.
Chertoff himself has a less-than-stellar record on immigration issues. During his short stint as federal appeals court judge in the Third Court District, Chertoff demonstrated a generally dismissive attitude toward asylum claims—ruling against immigrants in 14 of 18 immigration cases. In one case, he denied asylum to a Bangladeshi man who was imprisoned, severely beaten in jail, and forced to denounce his dissident political party. Despite his requiring 19 days of medical care after his release, Chertoff denied asylum on the grounds that the treatment didn’t constitute torture. Chertoff also overruled a lower-court immigration judge’s decision to question the credibility of the asylum petition of a Chinese man who was seeking refuge because his wife was involuntarily sterilized.
As the architect of the post-September 11th initiatives on the domestic war on terror, Chertoff supervised the round-up of 750 Arabs and other Muslims on suspicion of immigration violations. Treated as suspected terrorist sympathizers or material witnesses, the “suspects” were held without bond for as long as three months, often in solitary confinement, despite having never been charged with any crime. Eventually, most were released or deported after secret tribunals.
In a 2003 report, the Justice Department’s inspector general criticized these draconian measures as “indiscriminate and haphazard.” The report also concluded that Chertoff and other top government officials had instituted a “hold until clear” policy for immigrant detainees, even though immigration officials questioned the policy’s legality. In his book After, author Steven Brill describes how Chertoff obstructed the access by the post-9/11 detainees to lawyers, reasoning that they “could be questioned without lawyers present because they were not being charged with any crime.”
Not one of the almost exclusively Muslim “detainees” was indicted for terrorism-related crimes. Chertoff, who also coordinated the aggressive questioning of more than 5,000 Arab Americans immediately after the 9/11 attacks, remains unapologetic and continues to argue that the “war on terrorism” justifies the government’s right to hold suspects indefinitely without counsel as possible “enemy combatants.”
A look at Chertoff’s strong, aggressive record and statements on homeland security shows that Chertoff supports the kind of hard-headed, threat profiling measures and immigration enforcement opposed by the anti-profiling zealots,” wrote Michelle Malkin, author of Invasion: How America Welcomes Terrorists, Criminals, and Other Foreign Menaces to Our Shores and In Defense of Internment.
Writing in the Weekly Standard in December 2003, Chertoff defended himself and the Justice Department against charges that the Bush administration had gone beyond the historical precedents in its determination of what is permissible under the U.S. Constitution. According to Chertoff, President Bush has “avoided the kind of harsh measures common in previous wars.”...
Concerning the detention of “enemy combatants,” Chertoff argued that the Bush administration followed “customary and well-accepted practice of incapacitating enemy soldiers overseas.” Regarding such matters as deciding “how long combatants can be held when we are fighting a war of extended or indefinite duration,” Chertoff said we must “think outside the box but not outside the Constitution.”...
What about the role of the U.S. military or the CIA in home-front operations? Chertoff, writing as an appeals court judge, said: “Basic policy questions like this cannot be simply left to the judiciary.”
Chertoff believes that it is time for “the most creative legal thinking” about the role of the U.S. justice system in “fighting a war of extended duration.”
According to Chertoff, “We are at a transition point in the evolution of legal doctrine to govern the armed conflict of terror.”
http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1099
October 27, 2005
Maui man is charged with
selling B-2 bomber secrets
The FBI accuses the ex-Northrop engineer of
peddling stealth technology overseas
By Mary Vorsino, Honolulu Star-Bulletin
A 61-year-old Maui man who helped design the B-2 stealth bomber has been arrested for selling military secrets to foreign governments, the FBI said yesterday.
Noshir S. Gowadia, an engineer who worked for Northrop Corp. from November 1968 to April 1986, is being charged under federal espionage statutes for allegedly disclosing top-secret information relating to stealth technology to representatives of at least three countries.
The FBI would not reveal which countries got the information or how recently Gowadia was allegedly funneling them military secrets. Northrop officials could not be reached for comment last night.
Gowadia has been living in Maui for six years, a family member in Makawao said last night. She would not comment on the allegations against Gowadia, who made his first appearance in federal court in Honolulu yesterday afternoon....
Gowadia is in federal custody, charged with willfully communicating national defense information to a person not entitled to receive it. According to prosecutors, he faces up to 10 years in prison if convicted.
In a news release issued last night, FBI officials said that "Gowadia, over the last several years, has marketed himself to foreign military entities and other foreign persons."
It also said the military secrets relating to the B-2 that Gowadia allegedly disclosed were aimed at assisting foreign countries "in obtaining a higher level of military technology."
Gowadia was allegedly paid for the secrets, the FBI said....
This is the first case of its kind in the islands, U.S. Attorney Ed Kubo said last night. He declined to talk about the investigation....
It is being investigated by the FBI, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Immigrations and Customs Enforcement....
For more, GO TO > > > The Spy Who Came to Maui
For the latest REAL news, The Catbird recommends
Eric Shine’s radio program on:
The Republic Broadcasting Network
Pentagon Strips Air Force of
21 Major Weapons Programs
WASHINGTON (AP) - In a highly unusual move, the Pentagon’s top weapons buyer on Monday took away the Air Force’s authority to oversee 21 major programs with a combine value of $200 billion.
The move, called temporary, was made because of a civilian leadership vacuum at the Air Force after the departure last week of Peter Teets, who was under secretary of the Air Force as well as acting secretary. Teets had been fillin in since James Roche resigned as secretary in January.
It also comes amid continuing controversy over the Air Force’s handling of a multibillion-dollar Boeing aircraft lease deal that fell through last year and led to the conviction of former Air Force executive Darleen Druyun on charges of conspiring to violate conflict-of-interest rules.
Druyun admitted in court that she favored Boeing on deals worth billion of dollars because the company gave jobs to her daughter and son-in-law. Her admission led to a detailed Pentagon review of her nearly 10-year tenure as a key weapons buyer for the Air Force and prompted rival defense companies to file protests over Boeing contracts awarded during that period.
The episode has taken a tool on the Air Force. Since Roche departed, the White House has not nominated anyone to replace him as the Air Force secretary, a post that requires Senate confirmation. Some believe the current Navy secretary, Gordon England, will get the nomination.
In addition, no one has been nominated to replace Teets as the under secretary. What’s more, the post of Air Force acquisition chief has been vacant since Marvin Sambur left in January.
With Teets gone, the most senior civilian in the Air Force is Michael I. Dominquez, who has served since August 2001 as assistant secretary of the Air Force for manpower and reserve affairs....
In Monday’s announcement, the Pentagon said it was giving the decision-making authority for the 21 major Air Force weapons programs to Michael Wynne, the No. 2 Pentagon civilian in charge of weapons procurement.
The No. 1 slot has not had a Senate-confirmed holder since May 2003. Wynne was nominate for the top spot but his nomination – and others in the Air Force – have been blocked by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, as part of a long-running dispute over the Boeing lease deal....
The 21 programs include a $59.2 billion Boeing contract for C-17A Globemaster II advanced cargo aircraft, and a $31.7 billion Boeing and Lockheed Martin contract for the Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle....
Among other programs affected are air-to-air missiles, B-2 bomber radar modernization, C-5 cargo plane improvements, propulsion replacement for the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile and a $18 billion communications satellite program....
$ $ $
January 1, 2005
Top U.S. contractors had
run-ins with government
Records show past problems of companies
working with Homeland Security office
By Matt Kelley, The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - The largest Homeland Security Department contractors include two companies that paid millions to settle charges they defrauded the Pentagon, one firm that paid a foreign corruption fine and a business accused of botching a computer system for veterans hospitals, records show.
About a quarter of the $2.5 billion awarded to the 50 largest Homeland Security contractors came under no-bid contracts, agency records show. That’s lower, however, than the 44 percent of Pentagon contracts given under “other than full and open competition.”...
Some of the nation’s largest federal contractors have won the new business of protecting America from terrorists, including many with a recent history of legal run-ins with the government, the records show.
The two companies with the most business, nearly $700 million between them, were Boeing Co. and Integrated Coast Guard Systems, a partnership of defense giants Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman.
Those companies have paid more than $250 million in the past three years to settle charges of improprieties with their Pentagon contracts. Homeland Security audits also have accused the two companies of overcharging, in Boeing’s case by $49 million.
Homeland Security officials gave Congress a list of the top contractors through July and their competition status amid criticism of the agency’s management and oversight of its money. The criticism has ranged from overcharges to exorbitant employee awards that came at taxpayers expense.
The department was created by pulling together 22 federal agencies with 180,000 employees and dramatically increased funding, up to $33 billion for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1....
Analyst James Carafano of the conservative Heritage Foundation said some agencies within the department, such as the Coast Guard, have more serious contract oversight problems than others....
While the list of big contractors is dominated by well-known, large companies, there are a few lesser-known players who won large contracts.
For instance, Chenega Technology Services Corp., an Alaska Native corporation, got a $500 million no-bid contract to maintain and repair screening equipment at ports and border crossings under a legislative provision written by Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Homeland Security’s biggest contractor this year, Integrated Coast Guard Systems, is upgrading and expanding the Coast Guard’s fleet of ships, boats, airplanes and helicopters.
Clark Kent Ervin, the department’s inspector general, said in a report that hiring IGCS to install new engines in HH-65 helicopters would take longer and cost more than if the Coast Guard did the work itself.
The original IGCS proposal for the project was a month late and included “$123 million worth of goods and services that the Coast Guard did not ask for and could not afford,” Ervin’s report said.
The Coast Guard defended the contract, telling Ervin it believes the program is properly managed. IGCS spokeswoman Margaret Mitchell-Jones said the company agreed.
Another report from Ervin said Boeing, Homeland Security’s second-largest contractor last year, overcharged the department $49 million on a massive contract to install and maintain bomb detection and other screening equipment at U.S. airports....
Homeland Security’s critics also questioned a $229 million contract to technology giant BearingPoint. The Department of Veterans Affairs abandoned a BearingPoint computer system for a Florida hospital last fall because it failed a nine-month testing process. The Justice Department and VA are investigating....
For more, GO TO > > > BCCI: The Bank of Crooks & Criminals International; Nests in the Pentagon; The Bribes & Boondoggles of Boeing; The Carlyle Group; The Greed at Lockheed; The Torch of Eric Shine
December 3, 2004
Kerik nomination is
a ticking time bomb
Ellis Henican, Newsday
Campaign bodyguard to Rudy Giuliani.
Errand boy for the Saudi royal family.
Energetic exploiter of Sept. 11th tragedy.
Tough-talking publicity-hound vowing to bring law and order to Iraq - then hightailing it out of there after a disastrous 14 weeks, leaving the place far less safe than he found it.
Oh, the bullet points on Bernie Kerik's real-life resume just go on and on. But is this really the guy we want standing between us and the terrorists?
George W. Bush apparently thinks so.
White House sources were saying last night that Kerik, the scandal-scarred former commissioner of the New York Correction and Police departments, will be named today to take Tom Ridge's job as head of homeland security.
For now, let's give the Bush folks the benefit of the doubt: Maybe they've been wowed by Kerik's shameless swing-state Kerry-bashing in Bush's behalf. ("I fear another attack, and I fear that attack with ... Senator Kerry being in office responding to it.")
Maybe they've been bullied by Giuliani's bulldog lobbying for a loyal business buddy and after-hours pal. ("OK, Karl," you can almost hear Rudy say, "I won't be attorney general, but you gotta take Bernie at homeland security!")
Or maybe it's just that the FBI background check isn't back from the field.
Whatever the reason, the White House personnel office really ought to ask some probing questions around New York. You can bet they'll get an earful of heads-up about this hard-charging, thick-necked, shaved-head lightweight.
Let this be a warning from someone who's followed the man's ladder-climbing career: He's a personal and professional time bomb the Bushies will learn to regret. Don't say I didn't warn you, guys!
That's certainly the message that smart law-enforcement professionals in New York were exchanging yesterday, as they shook their heads in disbelief at Kerik's latest career goal.
"He couldn't run the Rikers commissary without getting greedy and making a mess, in a jam," one correction veteran said. "Now he's gonna be in charge of the Department of Homeland Security? Let's just hope the terrorists don't decide to come back."
This former subordinate was referring to just one of many petty scandals that have hung over Kerik's career. When he ran Correction, nearly $1 million of tobacco-company rebates were diverted into an obscure foundation Kerik was president of. This was for cigarettes bought with taxpayer money and then sold at inflated prices to jail inmates. But this rebate money - would kickbacks be a better word? - got spent entirely outside the normal rules for public funds.
No one was criminally charged. But a whole rash of IRS rules were seemingly violated. One board member quit in protest when the foundation treasurer refused to provide him with financial reports. And no one has ever explained where all the money went.
It was a typical Kerik deal. He behaved from start to finish like normal rules didn't apply to him.
It isn't possible in so little space to give an adequate tour of the man's rise from Jersey high-school dropout to prospective anti-terror boss.
As a public service, however, let me suggest a few ripe areas of personal inquiry that someone in Washington might like to pursue.
Along the way, don't lose sight of this: The homeland security chief stands between Osama bin Laden and our good-night sleep.
Why did he pull out of Iraq so suddenly? Does he think he did a pretty good job teaching the Baghdad police how to keep order and how to behave in "a free and democratic society," to use his words at the time?
Was Sept. 11th Commission member John Lehman on to something when he called Kerik's leadership after the terror attack "scandalous" and "not worthy of the Boy Scouts."
What exactly does he do at Giuliani Partners? How's that anti-crime campaign in Mexico City going? What companies and foreign governments are on his client list?
Why did Kerik send a New York City homicide detective to rouse TV hair and makeup artists in the middle of the night when his book publisher (and workout-partner) lost her cell phone?
What new job does he have in mind for John Picciano, his perennial chief of staff? Could Picciano really pass a federal background check? What about the complaint (later dropped) that he'd beaten up his correction-officer girlfriend and waved his gun around?
There are answers for all of it, I am sure. Answers to these few questions and many racier ones.
Over the weeks to come, Kerik will have a chance to answer all of them.
I, for one, am waiting.
So are a lot of people who've gotten to know the man in New York.
Copyright © 2004, Newsday, Inc.
From the book, “American Dynasty,” by Kevin Phillips:
The Axis of Evil -
and the Web of War Profits
Wars, profits, and new wealth have historically been closely linked in the United States, as in the rest of the world. Supplying armies and navies paid well. So did government-licensed looting....
In the United States, at least the politics of obtaining wealth through war has not had a particular party label... Each war had its profiteers, but there was no regional, party, or ideological continuity.
By the end of the twentieth century, however, what began three generations earlier as a new U.S. military-industrial complex had achieved glossy permanence....While many mid-twentieth-century plants had been built by government funds–from 1940 to 1942–a peak of 67 percent of industrial financing was federal–private capital totally dominated the last quarter of the twentieth century.
Military preparedness increasingly became a for-profit activity. By 2003, through an initiative launched by Defense Secretary Richard Cheney in 1992, many government-run military support activities were being replaced by privatization and national security entrepreneurs–the private military corporations (PMSs) that did everything from train police in Croatia to handle Alabama airbase logistics or restore captured oil fields....
If these functions collectively commanded a somewhat lower share of national gross domestic product in 2004 that they had during the Eisenhower years, the opportunities for private enterprise were greater. The much increased share of money going to Pentagon functions, information systems, high technology, homeland security, the CIA, and other intelligence services, “black operations,” and PMC contracts avoided the highly unionized workforces of yesteryear, creating a higher ration of commercial niches.
In the Eisenhower era, aerospace companies earned only a 2 to 3 percent return on assets, half that of manufacturing corporations overall. By the Bush-Cheney years, military contractors could expect two or three times that return....
Indeed, the basic 2004 U.S. military budget of $400 billion a year was more than twice as much as the combines outlays fo past and potential foes like Russia, China, Iraq, Syria, Iran, North Korea, Libya, and Cuba. The Axis of Evil was also the Axis of Reduced Military Resources. The U.S. outlay was twice that of all the NATO nations combined, and in 2002 the United States had accounted for 45.5 percent of all global conventional weapons deals and 48.6 percent of those concluded with developing nations. As weaponry became the most successful U.S. manufactured export, markets became economic drivers. Preparedness itself was not simply a necessary posture but a giant interest group.
Private military enterprises, rare to unthinkable in Eisenhower’s day, were becoming important governmental auxiliaries. Senior military officers liked how PNCs could edge into a difficult overseas situation without officially committing the United States or technically violating U.S. neutrality laws. They could sidestep public attention and congressional oversight....
The downside was that the PMCs aroused their own resentment, some of it fierce. One of the best know, the Vinnel Corporation – a specialist in training and advising police and military units in the Balkans and the Middle East (and a CIA cover) – became especially disliked during its quarter century of operations training internal security forces in Saudi Arabia, where its personnel reached several thousand. Its Riyadh facilities were car-bombed in 1995, killing five Americans. They were attacked again by a suicide bomber in May 2003 after the second Iraq war, when Turkish security forces trained by Vinnell turned back thousands of Iraqi Kurdish refugees to certain death, gunmen shot up the company’s Ankara, Turkey, offices. The killed a retired U.S. Air Force chief master sergeant.
The Carlyle Group, founded in 1987 as a merchant bank focused on political influence and defense-sector investments, became famous for turning its impressive portfolio of national-security-related companies – United Defense, BDM, Vinnell, U.S. Investigations Services, Composite Structures, EG&G, Federal Data Corporation, Lear Siegler, and Vought Aircraft – into winners for Carlye’s operation or profitable resale. This was achieved through the acumen and rainmaking of high-powered people ranging from George H.W. Bush, former secretary of state James Baker, and former defense secretary Frank Carlucci down to dozens of lesser cabinet, subcabinet, and senior regulatory agency officials.
Thirty to 40 percent yearly gains were common, but from the early days of the second Bush administration, there were conflict-of-interest charges. Carlyle’s preoccupation was with companies that could profit from its Washington connections. One newspaper called Carlyle “the thread which indirectly links American military policy in Afghanistan to the personal financial fortunes of it celebrity employees, not least the President’s father.”
“It should be a deep cause for concern that a closely held company like Carlyle can simultaneously have directors and advisers that are doing business and making money and also advising the president of the United States,” said Peter Eisner, managing director of the Center for Public Integrity.” The problem comes when private business and public policy blend together. What hat is former president Bush wearing when he tells Crown Prince Abdullah not to worry about U.S. policy in the Middle East?”
Richard Perle, the neoconservative stalwart who chaired the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board, was simultaneously an investor in Middle East war preparations. As described by Seymour Hersh in The New Yorker, Pearl is also a managing partner in a venture-capital company called Trireme Partners, L.P., which was registered in November, 2001, in Delaware. Trireme’s main business, according to a two-page latter that one if its representatives sent to [Saudi financierAnan] Khashoggi last November, is to invest in companies that are of value to homeland security and defense.”...
Homeland security became a cornucopia as the new Homeland Security Department’s annual budget hit $40 billion, and hundreds of Secretary Tom Ridge’s former aids and other insiders registered to lobby for companies seeking a slice of the pie.
“Homeland Security appears to be viewed by the lobbying firms as a huge honeypot,” complained Fred Wertheimer, president of the public interest group Democracy 21.
Those better connected than former Ridge aids had found the pot of gold within months of 9-11. Marvin Bush, the brother of George W. Bush, was a large shareholder–through his Winston Partners investment firm–in Sybase, which marketed a “Sybase PATRIOT Compliance Solution” to put companies and banks in compliance with the anti-money-laundering provisions of the 2001 USA Patriot Act. Clients included the People’s Bank of China and Sumitomo Mitsubishi Bank.
Former CIA director James Woolsey, a leading neoconservative, was a principal of the Paladin Capital Group, a private firm investing in companies that defended against terrorist attacks; Richard Perle had a stake in the Autonomy Corporation, a supplier of eavesdropping equipment to intelligence agencies.
I. Paul Bremer III, the antiterrorist expert named by Bush to govern Iraq in May 2003, was profiled this way by The Nation a month later: “On October 11, 2001, just one month after the terror attacks in New York and Washington [Bremer,] once Ronald Reagan’s Ambassador at Large for counter-terrorism, launched a company designed to capitalize on the new atmosphere of fear in U.S. corporate boardrooms. Crisis Consulting Practice, a division of insurance giant Marsh & McLennan, specializes in helping multinations come up with ‘integrated and comprehensive crisis solutions’ for everything from terror attacks to accounting fraud.”
Another group of firms, concentrated in and around Washington, D.C., profited from the CIA subcontractor market. Although the combined intelligence budgets were not only secret but tunneled like Swiss cheese by so-called black ops, estimates for the early 2000s put the total at some $35 billion a year. From this exchequer came tens of billions of dollars in annual contracts, most pouring into the so-called intelligence-industrial complex that surrounded the CIA’ Northern Virginia headquarters.
So loosely administered were some of these accounts that a 1996 congressional investigation “revealed that the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), a super-secret agency whose existence was publicly acknowledge only a few years ago, lost track of a $2 billion slush fund because it was so highly classified even top officials had no control over it.”
The world of CIA largesse was grand enough that “the CIA’s own 4,000 intelligence analysts are dwarfed by the more than 40,000 analysts who work for private companies that have government intelligence contracts.”
A second controversial aspect of CIA wealth and influence involved the Agency’s frequent, if unofficial, assertion of a modern version of benefit of clergy. If a CIA asset (as opposed to a mere salaried clerk or researcher) was indicted or arrested, the CIA officer intervened–with frequent success–to talk the local law enforcement agency, the FBI, or the U.S. attorney’s office out of prosecuting. Leave matters to us, the CIA said. This has been a virtual “get out of jail free” card enabling many CIA-connected operatives to avoid prosecution for various styles of moneymaking: drug running or, back during the eighties, milking federally insured mortgage programs or federally insured savings and loan associations.
One of Florida governor Jeb Bush’s former Miami business associates, real estate operator Camilo Padreda, a pre-Castro Cuban counterintelligence officer, ducked an S&L indictment in Texas when the CIA helped. Miguel Recarey, who had CIA connections and used his Miami-based International Medical Centers to help treat wounded Nicaraguan contras, was the business associate who had paid Jeb Bush a $75,000 real estate fee. When Recarey was indicted for large-scale Medicare fraud, his connections got him expedited $2.2 million IRS refund that allowed him to flee to Venezuela....
November 14, 2004
Death in Federal Jail Raises
Questions of Cover-up
Relatives of a Taiwanese national dispute the official
determination that he killed himself
By Rob Perez, Honolulu Star-Bulletin
A Taiwanese national found hanging from a bunk in a Honolulu jail cell last year was being investigated for suspicion of spying, several relatives say.
The government classified the death of Chen Chi Huang, 58, a suicide.
But his relatives dispute that. They believe the spying charge was bogus and blame the U.S. government for his death, saying Huang never should have been jailed in the first place.
“I don’t believe the government is partly responsible,” said Oahu resident Aurex Huang, 32, a nephew of Huang. “I think it’s their fault completely.”
The story behind Huang’s death is filled with so many inconsistences and questions that some doubt a clear picture will ever emerge publicly, continuing a mystery that has triggered talk of espionage, international intrigue, government cover-ups – even murder.
The biggest question among Huang’s relatives and others is why a successful Taiwanese businessman who came to Hawaii to see his high-school son graduate with top honors would allegedly hang himself at the Federal Detention Center, a month before the graduation.
Huang was taken directly to the prison from Honolulu Airport after arriving on a China Airlines flight from Taiwan on April 12, 2003. Eight days later, an inmate discovered Huang hanging by a bedsheet attached to the top bunk in his cell, according to the autopsy report.
He was rushed to the hospital in a coma and died four days later, never having regained consciousness.
The federal government has said little about the case since the Star-Bulletin first reported on it in February. At that time, immigration officials wouldn’t even disclose the specifics of why Huang was arrested. All they said was that he was detained for allegedly violating immigration law.
A federal Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman confirmed last week that her agency and the FBI still were investigating the case, but she couldn’t provide any details, including what was being investigated. The FBI wouldn’t acknowledge the existence of an investigation.
Huang traveled frequently to Honolulu because his wife, who is a U.S. citizen, and their three sons live here. The family owns a Salt Lake condo that the couple purchased in 1988. They also owned two Oahu TCBY yogurt shops, both of which Huang purchased with cash, his relatives said.
Government documents the Star-Bulletin recently obtained show that Huang was jailed for trying to enter the country without an immigrant visa and a proper labor certification — alleged infractions that, by themselves, shouldn’t have led to his incarceration, several immigration attorneys told the newspaper. He had a tourist visa when he arrived.
A U.S. immigration official said Huang’s detention was by the book and not unusual.
“They were following the guidance for holding a person pending appearance” before any immigration judge, said Jim Kosciuk, acting assistant port director in Honolulu for the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Although Huang had a tourist visa, he intended to work in Hawaii, but didn’t have the proper certification, according to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security documents, obtained by the Star-Bulletin through a Freedom of Information Act request. The documents also said Huang intended to apply for permanent U.S. residency but didn’t have the correct visa.
“To my knowledge, that’s not out of the ordinary” to detain someone for those alleged infractions, Kosciuk said.
Huang usually traveled at least five or six times a year to Hawaii and, whith the exception of one minor visa snafu in the early 1990s, never had any trouble entering this country, his relatives said.
If the visa issue was Huang’s only problem when he arrived from Taiwan last year, the worst penalty he faced was being sent back home – hardly something to commit suicide over, his relatives say....
Aside from the immigration issues, the relatives’ belief that Huang was the target of a national security investigation makes the case even more intriguing, though no federal agency has publicly confirmed - or ruled out - an espionage connection....
Huang ran an import-export business that dealt mainly in tropical fish, and in recent years he also started selling antiques, his relatives said. He did not have ties to Taiwan’s military or government, they said....
Adding to the intrigue, the Hawaii relatives and Huang’s wife have stopped talking since his funeral, even though she knows more about the case, the relatives said....
Huang’s wife, Nicole Huang, declined comment, noting that attorneys advised her not to fight the federal government, especially the FBI. She also said she wanted to protect her children. “The FBI put a lot of pressure on me and my kids,” she said, without elaborating.
Alan Ma, who represented Huang during his detention, also declined comment. Ma said he no longer represents the family.
The fact that federal authorities are still investigating this case nearly 20 months after Huang died, and after his death was ruled a suicide, fuels speculation about what happened.
The city Medical Examiner’s Office in May 2003 said Huang died from asphyxia due to a suicide hanging. It said a suicide note was found in his cell.
A year later, the prison bureau said it could not respond to the newspaper’s Freedom of Information request for the suicide note and other documents because they were part of an ongoing investigation.
An FBI spokesman had said in February that his agency conducted an inquiry and ruled out foul play.
Yet the fact that the FBI still is looking into the case only adds to the mystery.
The main mystery: What is being investigated?...
Many other oddities are linked to the case, adding to the suspicions that Huang’s relatives have about what actually happened – and whether a suicide really occurred. Though they have no evidence, the relatives said they believe Huang was murdered and question whether the government is involved in a cover-up.
“There was no way he would have killed himself,” Aurex Huang said.
Yueng Huang, who as the oldest of eight children raised Chen Chi Huang, the youngest, said the suicide note found in her brother’s cell didn’t appear to be in his handwriting. She said she briefly saw a copy Huang’s wife had, and the parts she saw mentioned leaving money to his wife and that he loved his sons.
The relatives also said the wife was told by a woman physician at Kapiolani Medical Center at Pali Momi, when Huang was taken from the prison, that his case didn’t seem to be a suicide. They didn’t know the physician’s name.
The way the Huang case was handled at the government-to-government level raises more questions.
The Taiwan government office in Honolulu said it usually is notified immediately whenever an arriving Taiwanese national is taken into custody at the airport. But the office said it wasn’t contacted in the Huang case until after he hanged himself, prompting the top Taiwan official locally to write a letter to the U.S. government questioning whether Huang was treated properly during his incarceration.
Huang’s relatives also are puzzled by a statement in the Homeland Security documents that indicated Huang only had $100 when he was detained. He always carried a lot of cash, especially when traveling, because he hardly used credit cards, the relatives said.
They said when Huang came to Hawaii, he usually would bring thousands of dollars but never more than $10,000, the level triggering cash-reporting requirements for travelers entering the United States....
They also said Huang’s behavior and the topics he discussed in the days, weeks and months before his death indicated he was looking forward to the future – something not consistent with someone considering suicide.
Huang talked about shutting his Taiwan business and moving to Hawaii so he could spend more time with his family, according to Yueng Huang.
He was especially proud of his middle son, who graduated a month afte Huang’s death as co-valedictorian at Moanaloua High School. “My uncle always bragged about his middle son and how well he was doing,” Aurex Huang said.
The last time his lawyer saw Huang alive, Huang was in good spirits, his sister said, and he talked about what he wanted to do when released from jail - dye his white hair and enjoy time with his sons.
Not long after that prison visit, the attorney was notified that Huang was found hanging in his cell.
The news came just a day before Huang was scheduled to appear before an immigration judge. One of the topics to be covered, a relative said, was a bond for Huang’s release.
The questions surrounding Huang’s death continue to haunt his relatives, and they’re hoping to get answers.
“I don’t know why he passed on,” Yueng Huang said. “I used to cry every day thinking about it. I still don’t know what happened.”
www.starbulletin.com/2004/11/14/news/story3.html
< < < FLASHBACK < < <
December 1, 2002
Tom Ridge takes on
his biggest battle
By Vicki Kemper and Richard T. Cooper, Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON - Of all the occupations that fill out Tom Ridge’s resume – prosecutor, congressman and governor of Pennsylvania among them – perhaps none more qualifies him to become America’s first secretary of Homeland that this: combat veteran.
Ever since President Bush proposed creating the department, an amalgam of 22 agencies and their 170,000 employees, old political hands have warned of a clash of bureaucratic cultures and intergovernmental turf wars.
But Monday, when Bush signed the bill creating the Department of Homeland Security, the strapping 6-foot-3 Ridge was right there with him as his choice for secretary.
Ridge, 57, brings more to the job – regularly described as requiring an encyclopedic mind and a biblical personality – than his Bronze Star, which he earned for valor in combat in the Vietnam War. He also has 13 months of experience as the first director of the White House Office of Homeland Security.
Not that this always was considered an asset. In his first months in the ill-defined – some said toothless – position, Ridge collected more bruises than medals.
Now, however, the same administration officials who long were rumored to have been considering practically everyone but Ridge say he is battle-tested and fully qualified for the post, which requires Senate confirmation.
Ridge has lived through a lot since he was sworn in as Bush’s homeland security adviser on Oct. 8 of last year – a day after the United States began bombing Afghanistan and three days after the first of what would be five anthrax-related deaths.
But many question how much safer the country is now, and whether the new department – which includes neither the FBI nor the CIA – can succeed in overcoming the intelligence failures that preceded the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks....
Above all, the new secretary of Homeland Security must demonstrate that the president is behind him.
That will be crucial in dealing with congressional challenges, said Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan. To persuade committee chairmen and others to yield turf, the secretary must present this as “an overriding national-security mandate which has the support of the president.”
Ridge appears to have no problem there.
His friendship with the Bush family dates to his political service to Bush’s father....
~ ~ ~
THE NEW DEPARTMENT
AT A GLANCE
~ ~ ~
Elements of legislation to create a 170,000-employee Homeland Security Department:
Major agencies transferred to
Homeland Security
Coast Guard
Customs Service
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Secret Service
Transportation Security Administration
Border inspection part of Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
Immigration and Naturalization Service
Labor provisions:
In a concession to Democrats who felt labor rules were being usurped, the agency is required to negotiate workplace changes with the employees’ union. Absent agreement, the department can make whatever changes it wants.
The president can waive union rights for national security, but only after he notifies Congress and waits 10 days.
The bill also:
Allows commercial airline pilots to carry guns in cockpits.
Allows a one-year delay in the Dec. 31 deadline for airports to install explosive detection systems to screen all checked baggage.
Bars the homeland security agency from doing business with American companies that move offshore to avoid U.S. taxes. The head of the agency can waive that rule for national or economic security reasons or if the prohibition results in American job losses or additional costs to the government.
Transfers the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms from the Treasury Department to the Justice Department to better perform its law-enforcement responsibilities... ATF’s revenue-collection functions will remain at Treasury.
Expands federal planning for domestic preparedness and recovery from terror attacks to include not just Washington, D.C., but adjacent suburbs as well.
Includes provisions that Democrats described as favors to special interests allied to the Republicans. Among them were new liability protections for pharmaceutical companies that make a mercury-based vaccine preservative and companies that provide airport screening services and other companies making anti-terrorism technology. Another university-based homeland security research center describes in such a way that it could exist only at Texas A&M.
Includes language that could make it more difficult to obtain information under the Freedom of Information Act and makes it a crime for an agency employee to reveal information that is supposed to be secret....
See also: The Torch of Eric Shine
December 1, 2002
No. 2 man has a long history
in corporate world, Washington
WASHINGTON – In announcing his choice of Gordon R. England to be No. 2 at the new Department of Homeland Security, President Bush picked a man with one leg in the corporate world and the other in national-security affairs.
England, 65, has served since May 2001 as Secretary of the Navy. From 1997 to 2001 he was executive vice president of General Dynamics, a military-equipment conglomerate. . . .
England also has served as a member of the Defense Science Board, a panel that advises the secretary of defense on a number of issues, especially technology. . . .
In the corporate world, he was responsible for General Dynamics’ information systems and international business. His official Navy biography also lists corporate positions as executive vice president of the Combat Systems Group, president of General Dynamics Land Systems and president of General Dynamics Fort Worth aircraft company. . . .
From 1993-1995, England was president of Lockheed Aircraft Company, Fort Worth, Texas.
Working with Adm. Vern Clark, the chief of naval operations, and Gen. James Jones, commandant of the Marine Corps, England was able to lobby for the programs of the Navy and Marines with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and the rest of the executive branch and on Capitol Hill, officials said.
“It was a persuasive team in making the case for their programs, making their arguments fit the priorities that Rumsfeld had set, and also to meet the priorities of Congress,” said one senior military official.
England’s nomination must be confirmed by the Senate.
For more, GO TO > > > The Torch of Eric Shine
Who's Who in the Bush Administration - The Cabinet
Gordon England, Secretary of the Navy
Gordon England, who has received Senate confirmation as the 72nd Secretary of the Navy, continues the Bush administration's trend of corporate appointees.
The Department of Defense leadership is now stacked with private businessmen experienced in industries such as energy, oil, and electronics.
England comes to the Pentagon after a long career with General Dynamics, most recently as an executive vice president.
A major defense contractor, General Dynamics focuses on producing information systems, shipbuilding and marine systems, and land and amphibious combat systems for the United States and its allies. Its military contracts include nuclear-powered submarines for the Navy and tanks for the Army. . . .
Before joining General Dynamics in 1966, England was an engineer with Honeywell, working on the Gemini Space Program, a transitional step between the pioneering Mercury and the Apollo Programs. He also served as program manager for Litton Industries on the Navy's E-2C Hawkeye aircraft.
With no actual military service experience, England will have to rely on his corporate engineering background. After graduating from the University of Maryland in 1961 with a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering, England earned a master's degree in business administration from the M. J. Neeley School of Business at Texas Christian University in 1975. . . .
USCFL - Who's Who in the Bush Administration - The Cabinet
© Copyright 1997-2001 United States Committee For A Free Lebanon. All rights reserved.
~ ~ ~
See also: The Torch of Eric Shine
* * * * *
< < < FLASHBACK < < <
Reprinted from NewsMax.com
April 28, 2001
As China Threat Grows,
U.S. Navy Faces Sub Shortage
By Charles R. Smith
Faced with its greatest threat since the end of the Cold War, the United States is short of submarines and cannot build subs for Taiwan. To make matters worse, U.S. Navy contractor General Dynamics announced this week a merger with rival submarine maker Newport News Shipbuilding.
The move makes General Dynamics the only sub builder in the U.S., giving it a monopoly on U.S. Navy contracts....
"The General Dynamics merger with Newport News underscores the need for America to re-energize our shipbuilding industry," stated Al Santoli, national security adviser to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif.
"A single contractor bidding on all U.S. Navy submarine contracts does not sound like good news for the Navy, American national security or the U.S. taxpayer. Our Navy is already at the forefront of our greatest security challenge of the 21st century. We are already spread way too thin."
~ ~ ~
For more, GO TO > > > The Torch of Eric Shine
x x x x x
General Dynamics
The primary business of General Dynamics is supplying weapons systems and services to the US government and its international allies. The company, which once was the largest defense contractor with $10.2 billion in revenue in 1990, underwent a massive downsizing between 1992 and 1994 in the face of declining defense budgets.
General Dynamics reversed course in 1995, making niche acquisitions and expanding it's focus on weapons system integration.
GD has dominant market positions in areas of the defense budget where there is little competition, such as land combat systems, and has emerged as the dominant shipbuilder for the US Navy....
Divestitures
February 1992: Sold Cessna Aircraft Co. to Textron Inc. for $600 million in cash.
August 1992: Sold its missile systems business to Hughes Aircraft Co. in exchange for stock in General Motors Corp. (the parent of Hughes) that was later sold for $387 million. Later, received an additional $9 million from Hughes as part of the deal.
November 1992: Sold a military electronics business to the Carlyle Group for a $9 million gain.
March 1993: Sold its jet-fighter business to Lockheed Corp. for $1.5 billion in cash. (Lockheed merged with Martin Marietta Corp. in 1995.)
May 1994: Sold its rocket business to Martin Marietta for $209 million.
Acquisitions
September 1995: Bought Bath Iron Works from Prudential Insurance for $300 million.
March 1996: Bought Teledyne Vehicle Systems for $55 million.
January 1997: Bought two defense units that specialize in turrets, transmissions and ammunition from Lockheed Martin for $450 million.
October 1997: Bought Advanced Technology Systems, formerly owned by Lucent Technologies and, before that, AT&T Corp., for $267 million.
December 1997: Purchased Computing Devices International for $500 million.
November 1998: Acquired NASSCO Holdings, a San Diego shipyard, for $415 million in cash and assumed debt.
April 2001: Proposed purchase of Newport News Shipbuilding, for $2.6 billion. The combined company would account for about 70% of the Navy shipbuilding budget, employ about 80% of America's military ship designers and engineers, and give General Dynamics control over the manufacture and maintenance of all nuclear- powered military ships. An attempt in 1999 to buy Newport News for $1.4 billion failed due to opposition from Newport News and the Navy. With the addition of Newport News, General Dynamics will have four military shipyards, while Northrop-Grumman owns the other two.
For more, GO TO > > > The Torch of Eric Shine
May 06, 2002
Here Is ANOTHER Huge Bush Scandal - TAIWANGATE!
In the past week, Taiwan has been rocked by the revelation that ex-president Lee Teng-hui operated a $100 million slush fund to buy influence overseas.
Part of this money was used to buy influence in the US through two people NOW IN TOP POSITIONS IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION.
Carl Ford was a lobbyist for Taiwan at Cassidy and Associates, which was reportedly paid $1.5 million from the slush fund to gain influence with Bush, and reportedly gave $1-$1.75 million to Bush and the Republicans in 1999 and 2000.
Ford's reward was being appointed Assistant Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Research, where he engineered Bush's sale of $4 billion in high-tech weapons to Taiwan last year. The sale included submarines built by General Dynamics - ANOTHER client of Ford's.
James Kelly ran the Scaife-funded Pacific Forum (connected to CSIS), which received $100,000 from the slush fund. Kelly is now Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia.
This scandal has received NO coverage in the US! ...
TAIWANGATE! Bush’s latest scandal.
The Carlyle Group
by Victor Thorn
A few weeks ago, James Baker publicly offered advice to the Bush Administration on how they should proceed with their war on Iraq. What he and every newscaster or commentator failed to mention was that Baker is now employed by the highly-influential Carlyle Group, which is the eleventh largest defense contractor in the United States.
In essence, then, we have a man trying to influence public policy while privately employed by a company that has a vested interest in activating America’s War Machine.
If you’re not familiar with them, the Carlyle Group has become a powerhouse in affecting the direction in which our foreign policy takes, especially in regard to war. They accomplish this by hiring former government officials, then investing in private companies that are subject to government change (i.e. the military and telecommunications). Who, you may ask, do they employ to secure their government contracts?
Well, check-out this list for starters:
Frank Carlucci –– Department of Health, Education and Welfare - 1970’s
Deputy Director, CIA –– 1978-81
Deputy Secretary of Defense –– 1981-82
National Security Director –– 1987-89
George Bush - CIA Director –– 1976-77
Vice President of the United States –– 1981-89
President of the United States –– 1989-93
James Baker - Chief of Staff –– 1981-85
Secretary of the Treasury –– 1985-89
Secretary of State –– 1989-93
Dick Darman - Former White House Budget Chief
William Kennard - Former Head, FCC
Arthur Levitt - Former Head, SEC
John Major - Former Prime Minister, Britain
Fidel Ramos - Former Philippine President
Afsaneh Beschloss - Treasurer & Chief Investment Officer of the World Bank
Anand Panyarachum –– Former President, Thailand
Karl Otto Pohl - Former President, Bundesbank
Louis Vuitton - French Aerobus Company
Park Tae Joon - Former South Korean Prime Minister
Alwaleed Sin Talal bin Abdulaziz Alsaud –– Saudi Arabian Prince
George Soros - New World Order/Bilderberg luminary & int’l financier
Fred Malek - George Bush Sr’s campaign manager . . .
Carlyle also employs the former chairman of BMW and Nestle, is interviewing former Clinton cabinet members (to insure that they have both sides of the aisle covered), plus once hired Colin Powell and AOL Time-Warner Chairman Steve Case to speak at a meeting at Washington D.C.’s Monarch House.
Plus, if we look at James Baker again, we’ll find that he’s on the board of Azerbaijan International Oil Company, in which two U.S. oil companies hold 40% of the shares.
Who are these two companies? The first is Amoco, who has on their payroll none other than Zbigniew Brzezinski (Trilateral Commission founder, National Security Advisor for the Carter Administration, Globalist supreme, and David Rockefeller’s puppet on a string).
The second is Pennzoil, who has on their payroll Brent Scowcroft, former National
Security Advisor under George Bush, Sr.
But the man that really brought it all together is Frank Carlucci, who holds
directorships on such companies as General Dynamics, Westinghouse, the Rand
Corporation, and Ashland Oil, plus sits on the board of directors of twelve other
companies.
Carlucci was also the college classmate of someone very closely related to our current administration’s War Machine – Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld!
What relevance does this association have you may wonder?
I think it is of great importance, for in February, 2001, Carlucci and Vice President Dick Cheney met with Donald Rumsfeld when the Carlyle Group had several billion-dollar defense projects under consideration. (If you haven’t guessed, the Carlyle Group fared quite well when all was said and done.)
Do you still think these ties don’t matter? Philip Agee, in his book “On the Run” details all of Carlucci’s CIA connections, many of whom he hired (along with his Pentagon cronies) when he joined Carlyle in 1989....
It’s all about power and access, folks, as Oliver Burkeman and Julian Burger pointed out in “The Guardian” on October 31, 2001:
“Carlyle has become the thread which indirectly links American military policy in Afghanistan to the personal financial fortunes of its celebrity employees, not the least the current President’s father.”
Is the picture becoming clearer? Now we’re getting to the bottom of America’s War Machine.
The Carlyle Group is set to make huge amounts of money from our upcoming military conflicts and weapons expenditures. In other words, when I talk about the War Machine, these folks are at the crux of it. They’re the war profiteers that keep its wheels greased!
Dan K. Thomasson, former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service, summed it up best in March, 2001. “Nothing in recent history seems to approach the success this group has had in the wholesale conversion of former high government rank to gigantic profits.”
Peter Eisner, Managing Director of the Center for Public Integrity, adds, “It should be a
deep cause for concern that a closely held company like Carlyle can simultaneously
have directors and advisors that are doing business and making money and also
advising the President of the United States.” ...
But who is the Carlyle Group?
Well, their office is located only a few blocks from the White House, and it was founded by three men:
David Rubinstein –– aide in the Carter Administration
Bill Conway –– Chief Financial Officer at MCI
Dan D’Aniello –– financial executive at Marriott
They named their group “Carlyle” after a New York hotel favored by one of their first investors, the Mellon family. They now have an ownership stake in 164 different companies, have 535 investors, operate in 55 different countries, and have $13.5 billion in capital. International financier George Soros invested $100 million in them, while the California Public Employees Retirement System dumped $305 million into their laps.
They also recently purchased the KorAm Bank, thus accelerating their entry into the highly lucrative Asian markets. . . .
On May 5, 2001, the New York Times described the Carlyle Group as such: “It owns so many companies that it is now in effect one of the nation’s biggest defense contractors and a force in global communications. Its blue-chip investors include major banks and insurance companies, billion dollar pension funds and wealthy investors.”
Hmm, they have a firm, controlling grip on both the War Machine and the media …… convenient, don’t you think?
After reading how deeply established they are as “Insiders,” do you think that the Carlyle Group has America’s best interests at heart, or their own which entails capitalizing on war? An excellent example can be found in the recent $470 million contract that “United Defense,” a Carlyle subsidiary, received.
And what did they get it for? To develop the CRUSADER, which is such a faulty, antiquated, horrendous product that it was described by Eric Miller of “The Project on Government Oversight” as follows. “The Crusader has been the GAO’s (Government Accounting Office) poster child for bad weapons development.”
The Crusader Project was so maligned that the government was set to drop it completely. But lo and behold, what happened? War was on the horizon, Carlyle pulled a few strings, and welluh –– a $470 million contract is thrown Carlyle’s way for the Crusader.
Funny how things happen, huh?
If that’s not bad enough, the Carlyle Group is also the financial advisor to a certain government.
Who?
Saudi Arabia.
In fact, they make nearly $50 million/year training the Saudi Arabian National Guard --- troops that are sworn to protect the Saudi royal family!
Now, if all hell breaks loose in the Middle East, and considering that Saudi Arabia has said that it won’t support our efforts against Iraq, who do you think the Saudi soldiers will kill?
Their own kind –– Arabs –– or the invading “white American devils?”
If you ask me, we’ve entered very treacherous waters, all for the sake of making money off of warfare. Regardless of what they say, these men in the Carlyle Group epitomize a very nefarious form of evil via their actions....
For much more, GO TO > > > Birds that Drink from Cesspools!
x x x x x
December 1, 2002
Bush cuts pay raises
for federal workers
Move attributed to national emergency
due to anti-terror campaign
Associated Press
WASHINGTON – Federal workers will get a smaller pay raise next month because of President Bush is freezing part of the increase, citing a national emergency because of the fight against terrorism.
The decision is yet another blow to the civilian federal work force, which has been the target of sweeping changes in the government bureaucracy.
“The same week the president claimed victory on the creation of the Homeland Security Department, he is sending the wrong message to the employees who will work there,” Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said yesterday....
In a letter sent Friday to congressional leaders, Bush said he was using his authority to change workers’ pay structure in times of “national emergency or serious economic conditions” to limit raises to 3.1 percent....
“A national emergency has existed since Sept. 11, 2001,” Bush wrote.
“Such cost increases would threaten our efforts against terrorism or force deep cuts in discretionary spending or federal employment to stay within budget.”
Military personnel still will receive a 4.1 percent increase and aren’t affected.
Earlier this month, the administration announced it wants to let private companies compete for up to half of the 1.8 million federal jobs.
Also, Bush won broad powers to hire, fire and move civil service-protected workers in 22 agencies being merged into the new Homeland Security Department.
“It’s been a tough year for federal employees,” said Paul Light, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and an expert on the federal work force.
“I don’t think any one of them will be surprised. It’s one of several lumps of coal in the stocking this year.” http://www.dhs.gov/index.shtm
# # #
"Our safety, our liberty, depends upon preserving the Constitution of the United States as our Fathers made it inviolate. The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
-- Abraham Lincoln
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
x x x x x
t t t t t
National Priorities Project - Cost of War
$ $ $ $ $
A Timeline of Oil and Violence in Iraq
t t t t t
The Dixie Chicks: “I Hope”
THE EAGLE HOODED:
THE 9-11 COVERUP
* * * * *
X X X X X
! ! ! ! !
* * * * *
STILL NOT SURE WHO’S TELLING THE TRUTH?
THEN GO TO
\/
A Connecticut Yankee in King Kamehameha’s Court
Another Reason for Bringing the Troops Home
APCOA: Vultures in the Parking Lot
Birds that Drink from Cesspools
The Bribes & Boondoggles of Boeing
Citigroup: Vampires in the City
Condoleezza & The Chicken Hawks
Confessions of a Whistleblower
Dahr Jamail’s MidEast Dispatches
Dirty Money, Dirty Politics & Bishop Estate
8th Estate Public Media & Researh
Flying High in Hawaii: The Ron Rewald Story
Marsh & McLennan: The Marsh Birds
Nests of The Insurance Vampires
Tarnished Wings: The Greed at Lockheed
Sukamto Sia: The Indonesian Connection
The Silence of the Whistleblowers
The United Defense Industries Matrix
The Silence of the Whistleblowers
Vampires in the U.S. Dept of Transportation
Vultures in The Nature Conservancy
War Images from “Scoop” Independent News
~ o ~
MORE OF THE CATBIRD’S FAVORITE LINKS
~ o ~
FAIR USE NOTICE. This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
Originally published: December 1, 2002
Last Update August 30, 2009, by The Catbird
CHRONOLOGY
December 1, 2002: Originally posted on www.the-catbird-seat.net
March 13, 2007: The U.S. Dept of Justice gets Order from Judge David Ezra to shut down website
August 30, 2009: Latest update on www.kycbs.net
~ ~ ~
THE CATBIRD SEAT ARCHIVES
The Catbird Seat Archives: 2000-2002
The Catbird Seat Archives: 2002-2007* * * * *