SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (54788)9/6/2004 11:59:50 AM
From: Suma  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
There are priceless. Where did you ever find them. I copied and pasted them and sent them to people who like to laugh.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (54788)9/6/2004 2:57:29 PM
From: Rascal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
(Perle's the Swine, just like it seemed. Wonder if Newt's going to get caught. I heard him explaining on Fox that Chalabi is Innocent of all charges. Guess they'll put us on Orange by Wed. Clinton sucked the air out of W's bump.)

September 6, 2004
Perle Asserts Hollinger's Conrad Black Misled Him
By STEPHEN LABATON
WASHINGTON, Sept. 5 - Last fall, as the board of Hollinger International prepared to oust its founding executive, Conrad M. Black, the director most protective and supportive of him turned to a friend and balked.

"This is a kangaroo court," a person recalled the director, Richard N. Perle, as saying in defense of Lord Black, who had been accused by investors of improperly siphoning millions of dollars to other companies he controlled.

But last week, Mr. Perle's view of Lord Black changed. Issuing his first public statements since being heavily criticized in an internal report for rubber-stamping transactions that company investigators say led to the plundering of the company, Mr. Perle now says he was duped by his friend and business colleague.

Mr. Perle, a top Pentagon official in the Reagan administration, wielded considerable influence in foreign-policy circles as recently as 2002 as an intellectual parent to the neoconservatives. He was named to the Hollinger board in 1994, joining other like-minded men selected by Lord Black, a self-made businessman from Canada who surrounded himself with conservative thinkers. He particularly did that at Hollinger, a global media company whose holdings at the time included The Chicago Sun-Times, The Jerusalem Post, The Sunday and Daily Telegraph and The Sydney Morning Herald.

But the relationship between the two men was particularly special, friends and Hollinger officials recall. Lord Black approved plans that ultimately earned Mr. Perle more than $5 million - including a bonus formula that rewarded Mr. Perle for the successful investments he placed on behalf of a subsidiary of Hollinger but did not subtract for the losers. Mr. Perle served on a three-member executive committee of the board headed by Lord Black. The two men socialized frequently and traveled together extensively on the company jet, once going to see Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel.

Even so, by 2002, Lord Black was complaining in internal company messages about Mr. Perle.

Now, their relationship, which has come under scrutiny by federal regulators and investors, has decidedly changed.

In the face of federal investigations and a scathing internal report for Hollinger by Richard C. Breeden, a former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Mr. Perle has broken ranks and turned on Lord Black.

The report contends that Lord Black improperly took hundreds of millions of dollars for himself and associates - and that Mr. Perle was the enabler, approving some questionable transactions at the same time he was being heavily compensated at the direction of Lord Black. The report said that Mr. Perle told the committee he often signed documents without reading them, and it singled him out among the directors for conflicts of interest.

"With the notable exception of Perle, none of Hollinger's non-Black group directors derived any financial or other improper personal benefit from their service on Hollinger's board," the report said. "It is, of course, possible for a conflicted board member to act at least somewhat responsibly. As a conflicted executive committee member, however, Perle did not. Rather, his executive committee performance falls squarely into the 'head-in-the-sand' behavior that breaches a director's duty of good faith and renders him liable for damages."

From his vacation home in southern France late Friday, issuing the outlines of his legal defense for the first time, Mr. Perle said that he was misled.

"The special committee has concluded that Lord Black and other members of the Ravelston Management Group misled the directors of Hollinger, including me, concerning the scope of their compensation, the payment of noncompete payments and the related-party nature of several transactions," Mr. Perle said, referring to the holding company run by Lord Black that effectively controlled Hollinger. "As the report shows, critical information was either not revealed or obscured as matters were presented to the audit and executive committees and the full board of directors.

"I did not participate in or profit in any way from the management agreements, related-party transactions or noncompete payments at issue," the Perle statement added.

Mr. Perle's lawyer, Dennis Block, went further, saying that the Breeden report was libelous. "It is factually and legally inaccurate," Mr. Block said, declining to go into specific detail.

Both the Breeden report and people who know Lord Black and Mr. Perle describe a symbiotic relationship.

"Conrad Black, who I know well, thought Richard Perle was the font of foreign-policy wisdom," said Leslie H. Gelb, the president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, who met Mr. Perle in the 1960's when both were aides to United States senators. Mr. Gelb said he came to know Lord Black at the council. "Once that happened, Black and Perle figured out how to work together to make more money."

For Mr. Perle, the Breeden report is the latest of several setbacks in both policy and business arenas.

Less than two years ago, he had forged a place for himself at the pinnacle of power where Washington policy-making and corporate money-making intersect.

He advised George W. Bush on foreign policy during his 2000 presidential campaign and went on to become chairman of the Defense Policy Board, an influential advisory board to the Defense Department. His protégés were placed in important administration jobs; he was on the boards of several start-up companies and advised others about how to deal with the administration. He was preparing to open a venture capital fund, Trireme, to make investments in industries related to defense and homeland security. Hollinger made an initial investment of $2.5 million in the fund, but at last accounting it had lost $1 million in value.

Now, Mr. Perle's position, both in the corporate world and in policy circles, has been shaken.

In the Hollinger case, regulators are preparing to seek an order barring him and Lord Black from serving on boards of public companies, and the Justice Department has opened an inquiry to examine whether any criminal laws were violated. The Breeden report said that because Mr. Perle was a "faithless fiduciary," the company would seek to compel him to return the $5.4 million in payments he received as a director and as head of Hollinger Digital, the subsidiary that invested in Internet and new media ventures.

In the last few months, Mr. Perle, 62, has also alienated former allies at the Pentagon for his continued defense of Ahmad Chalabi, the Iraqi opposition leader who has recently come under suspicion of leaking important intelligence information to Iran. Mr. Perle was forced to step down from the Pentagon advisory board after disclosures about his plans to work for Global Crossing and his meeting with a Saudi businessman, Adnan Khashoggi.

Mr. Perle's friends say that he is the victim of unjustified attacks that are motivated more by policy vendettas than substance.

"It is not surprising that the attacks on Richard have accompanied his rise to influence," said Jeane J. Kirkpatrick, who served as ambassador to the United Nations in the Reagan administration. She first met Mr. Perle when the two were advising Senator Henry M. Jackson, a Washington Democrat and staunch conservative on foreign-policy matters. She emphasized that she knew nothing of his business dealings, but was speaking about the criticism Mr. Perle has encountered over his policy positions.

Other friends say they are confident that he will be vindicated.

"Over the years, endless accusations have been made against him," said Michael A. Ledeen, a friend since the 1970's and colleague of Mr. Perle's at the American Enterprise Institute. "All have proven false, and I'm certain this one will be as well."

But others who have known Mr. Perle over the years say that he has been a consummate risk taker in both his business dealings and in some of the foreign policies he advocated, and that he ultimately may have been lured by millions of dollars in compensation and benefits to put aside ethical considerations, as the Breeden report concluded.

"Richard has always been willing to take the highest risks, playing for the highest stakes on policy issues over the years and often winning, but this is also really a story of being seduced by money," said Mr. Gelb, a former official at the State and Defense departments and a former columnist at The New York Times. "People in the foreign policy world do not make a lot of money. They go to think tanks, government, academe, and generally get $125,000 to $150,000 a year. When you are touched by lightning and manage to get into the inner sanctum to make money, the opportunities are delicious."

Although friends of Lord Black and Mr. Perle describe a close relationship between the two, the Breeden report also suggests that the relationship was not always cordial.

According to the report, after Mr. Perle, without the authorization of Hollinger's board, signed a document on Dec. 25, 2002, that appeared to commit Hollinger to invest $25 million in his venture capital fund, Trireme, Lord Black sent an e-mail message to the president of Hollinger Digital, in which he wrote, "As I suspected, there is a good deal of nest-feathering being conducted by Richard which I don't object to other than that there was some attempt to disguise it behind a good deal of dissembling and obfuscation.

"My instinct told me that these two were trying to smoke one past us," Lord Black wrote, referring to Mr. Perle and an associate at Trireme.

"I think they have done a good job rummaging all this together, but they should treat us as insiders with our hands cupped as the money flows down, and not as outsiders pouring in the money," he continued.

According to the Breeden report, Mr. Perle signed the Dec. 25 document as "co-chairman, Hollinger Digital." But he told the special committee that he did not believe his signature would be binding and that he signed the document just as he was leaving for vacation in France, in anticipation of Lord Black's approval of the investment.

The report suggests in one passage that Lord Black ultimately agreed to permit Hollinger to make a $2.5 million investment in Trireme to get Mr. Perle to resign as head of Hollinger Digital, telling three top Hollinger executives by e-mail messages that he was "well aware of Richard's shortcomings" and another that he was "well aware of what a trimmer and a sharper Richard is at times."

In another e-mail message, sent to a Hollinger executive in early January 2003, he wrote: "I have been exposed to Richard's full repertoire of histrionics, cajolery and utilization of fine print. He hasn't been disingenuous exactly, but I understand how he finessed the Russians out of deployed missiles in exchange for noneventual deployment of half the number of missiles of unproven design."

In February 2002, according to the report, Lord Black sent a letter to Mr. Perle complaining that Hollinger had been receiving expenses from an American Express card for $1,000 to $6,000 a month "and there is no substantiation of any of the items which include a great many restaurants, groceries and other matters. This is not a system that conforms to the standards being imposed in every area of this company."

The report said it could not find a reply from Mr. Perle.

Rascal @ShockedShocked.com
nytimes.com.



To: Jim Willie CB who wrote (54788)9/6/2004 11:06:45 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 89467
 
Graham book: Inquiry into 9/11, Saudi ties blocked
______________________________

By FRANK DAVIES
The Miami Herald
Posted on Sun, Sep. 05, 2004

WASHINGTON - Two of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had a support network in the United States that included agents of the Saudi government, and the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship, Sen. Bob Graham wrote in a book to be released Tuesday.

The discovery of the financial backing of the two hijackers ''would draw a direct line between the terrorists and the government of Saudi Arabia, and trigger an attempted coverup by the Bush administration,'' the Florida Democrat wrote.

And in Graham's book, Intelligence Matters, obtained by The Herald Saturday, he makes clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties on the House and Senate intelligence committees.

Graham also revealed that Gen. Tommy Franks told him on Feb. 19, 2002, just four months after the invasion of Afghanistan, that many important resources -- including the Predator drone aircraft crucial to the search for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda leaders -- were being shifted to prepare for a war against Iraq.

Graham recalled this conversation at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa with Franks, then head of Central Command, who was ``looking troubled'':

``Senator, we are not engaged in a war in Afghanistan.''

''Excuse me?'' I asked.

''Military and intelligence personnel are being redeployed to prepare for an action in Iraq,'' he continued.

Graham concluded: 'Gen. Franks' mission -- which, as a good soldier, he was loyally carrying out -- was being downgraded from a war to a manhunt.''

Graham, who was chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee from June 2001 through the buildup to the Iraq war, voted against the war resolution in October 2002 because he saw Iraq as a diversion that would hinder the fight against al Qaeda terrorism.

He oversaw the Sept. 11 investigation on Capitol Hill with Rep. Porter Goss, nominated last month to be the next CIA director. According to Graham, the FBI and the White House blocked efforts to investigate the extent of official Saudi connections to two hijackers.

Graham wrote that the staff of the congressional inquiry concluded that two Saudis in the San Diego area, Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Bassan, who gave significant financial support to two hijackers, were working for the Saudi government.

Al-Bayoumi received a monthly allowance from a contractor for Saudi Civil Aviation that jumped from $465 to $3,700 in March 2000, after he helped Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhdar -- two of the Sept. 11 hijackers -- find apartments and make contacts in San Diego, just before they began pilot training.

When the staff tried to conduct interviews in that investigation, and with an FBI informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who also helped the eventual hijackers, they were blocked by the FBI and the administration, Graham wrote.

The administration and CIA also insisted that the details about the Saudi support network that benefited two hijackers be left out of the final congressional report, Graham complained.

Bush had concluded that ''a nation-state that had aided the terrorists should not be held publicly to account,'' Graham wrote. ``It was as if the president's loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America's safety.''

Saudi officials have vociferously denied any ties to the hijackers or al Qaeda plots to attack the United States.

Graham ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic presidential nomination and then decided not to seek reelection to the Senate this year. He has said he hopes his book will illuminate FBI and CIA failures in the war on terrorism and he also offers recommendations on ways to reform the intelligence community.

On Iraq, Graham said the administration and CIA consistently overplayed its estimates of Saddam Hussein's threat in its public statements and declassified reports, while its secret reports contained warnings that the intelligence on weapons of mass destruction was not conclusive.

In October 2002, Tenet told Graham that ''there were 550 sites where weapons of mass destruction were either produced or stored'' in Iraq.

''It was, in short, a vivid and terrifying case for war. The problem was it did not accurately represent the classified estimate we had received just days earlier,'' Graham wrote. ``It was two different messages, directed at two different audiences. I was outraged.''

In his book, Graham is especially critical of the FBI for its inability to track al Qaeda operatives in the United States and blasts the CIA for ``politicizing intelligence.''

He reserves his harshest criticism for Bush.

Graham found the president had ''an unforgivable level of intellectual -- and even common sense -- indifference'' toward analyzing the comparative threats posed by Iraq and al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.

When the weapons were not found, one year after the invasion of Iraq, Bush attended a black-tie dinner in Washington, Graham recalled. Bush gave a humorous speech with slides, showing him looking under White House furniture and joking, ``Nope, no WMDs there.''

Graham wrote: ``It was one of the most offensive things I have witnessed. Having recently attended the funeral of an American soldier killed in Iraq, who left behind a young wife and two preschool-age children, I found nothing funny about a deceitful justification for war.''


miami.com