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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: geode00 who wrote (98873)2/9/2007 10:14:37 PM
From: SiouxPal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362403
 
All About the Benjamins
Larry Beinhart


At last, the missing billions in Iraq are in the news. Praise due to Harry Waxman, who should be regarded as one of America's heroes.

That being said, there are some very significant points about the story that have not come out. Also, it is a story about all that is wrong with American's media.

Every journalist I have ever spoken to, or heard from, or read, recites the same litany. That they go with the story. If it's an exciting story they will cover it.
Here's the story, in brief.

The US voted about $21 billion dollars for the reconstruction of Iraq. Paul Bremer the Third - as head of the occupation authority, the CPA, an American run organization - had control over that money. Shortly after it was appropriated, one of the many Halliburton scandals erupted, the overcharging for gasoline from Kuwait. Congress than passed a bill requiring accounting and, for large expenditures, competitive bids.

The CPA immediately stopped spending that money.

Instead, they turned to another source of funds. Iraqi money. This was a combination of accounts frozen during Saddam's reign and Saddam's personal money, wherever they could find it. It also included the money in the Oil for Food program, which the CPA took over from the UN, and Iraq's ongoing oil revenues. All told this came to about - a best guess - nineteen billion dollars.

There were two things important about that money. First, it was not supposed to be spent by the CPA. It was supposed to be held for Iraq, whenever they got their own government. However, there were no accounting restrictions on it. Nor would there ever be anyone to answer to. The moment an Iraqi government actually came into power, the CPA would be dissolved. Indeed, when the time for transfer was accelerated, the CPA rushed to spend that money. By the time of the transfer, they had blown through all but nine hundred million of it. With barely of trace of where it went. What about the $21 billion of our money that the US had so generously - and perhaps sensibly - appropriated for the reconstruction? By the time the CPA was dissolved, Bremer had only spent half a billion of it.

That got spent later. But on what? Between the two sources there was forty billion dollars available to rebuild Iraq. Where are the hospitals, schools, power plants, water and sewer systems, the electrical grids, and the garbage collections?

The story had certain great and colorful features. The one that is now featured was that the loaded pallets of cash onto giant transport planes, benjamins wrapped up in bricks, and flew them to Iraq. There, they were then handed out in cash. Less notes is the fact that suitcases of cash were given to military personnel (it's claimed to nobody below the rank of major), who then drove off with it in their humvees to presumably spend on personal reconstruction projects. With no accounting. Not even digital cell phone pictures of, here, here's the sewer we had dug, here's the kindergarten we built. Nothing. Just a suitcase full of hundred dollars bills and have a nice day.

Here's a tidbit for you:

One chunk of the money -- $1.4 billion - was deposited into a local bank by Kurdish leaders in northern Iraq but could be tracked no further. The auditors reported that they were shown a deposit slip but could find no additional record to explain how the money was used or to prove that it remains in the bank. Bryan Bender, The Boston Globe, 10/16/2004
Please - note the date on that story. October, 2004.
This was all known at least two and half or three years ago.

The story was broken in the US, in May, 2004, by Andrew Cockburn in Salon. By 2005, a Nexis search showed only three stories in the mainstream media relating to it. The one quoted above, another in The Baltimore Sun and one on the inside pages of the New York Times. I wrote about it in Fog Facts, Searching for Truth in the Land of Spin, published in October, 2005.

Why wasn't it a big story then? And why is it now?

Because it's not about the story.

It's not about the drama of the story. It's not about the significance of the story. The significance of the story is that it explains a great deal about why Iraq never did get reconstructed. It illustrates how this administration runs just about anything. And it should post a warning sign - in flashing neon colors - when they ask for money again. For more of the same thing. Especially when they don't want to account for what happened then and can't say how they've fixed it now.

It's about the source of the story.

The source of the story determines if it gets covered and how big the coverage is. (This does not apply to politically neutral scandal stories, like Anna Nicole's death and to easily videoed, politically neutral stories like snowstorms and hurricanes.)

The story gets coverage now, because it comes from the chairman of a congressional committee. Which 'authoritative.' Also easy, because the hearings are scheduled and the press invited and press releases are handed out.

It didn't get coverage for almost three years. Anyone in the mainstream media, who covers the war, Iraq, the administration, spending, and waste in government should be asking themselves why? Why have they become simply transmitters for official handouts? Instead of journalists. These are questions, of course, for all journalists. It is a question in particular for the Washington bureau of the New York Times. Which had the story, printed one piece of it, then deliberately walked away from it.

huffingtonpost.com



To: geode00 who wrote (98873)2/10/2007 1:06:23 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 362403
 
Dear Scott, As you know I'm not leading a campaign for the presidency in 2008. Instead I have chosen to campaign to end the war in Iraq and protect America.

Yesterday I stood up with a remarkable group of Iraq war veterans who are speaking out because they believe the best way to support the troops is to change a course that squanders their lives. When brave patriots suffer and die because of the incompetence of mere politicians, the only patriotic choice is to demand change.

These veterans offered a profile in courage.

The Senate this week provided a profile in politics -- Republicans blocking even a vote up or down, one way or another on a bi-partisan resolution opposing the Bush escalation.

This has to end.

Republicans refuse even to go on record over the Bush escalation. We need to escalate the pressure for a policy change.

That's why I am introducing legislation that will again set a firm one-year deadline for the redeployment of most American troops from Iraq.

If you agree it is time to set a deadline, come to setadeadline.com and become a citizen co-sponsor of the legislation.

In addition to setting a deadline, my legislation includes key recommendations of the Iraq Study Group, many of which we have been advocating for some time. It will:

-launch a major diplomatic initiative, the only hope for a sustainable resolution in Iraq

-enforce a series of benchmarks to hold Iraqis accountable for meeting key political objectives

-change the American military mission to training Iraqi security forces and counter-terrorism operations

-maintain an over the horizon presence to protect American regional interests.

Learn more about the legislation at:

setadeadline.com

Now that a new Democratic Congressional majority has convened in the U.S. Capitol, a deadline must be set. The President must respect the real needs of our troops and the will of the American people.

Step by step, we will ensure that he does.

Co-sign the legislation:

setadeadline.com

Thank you,

John Kerry

P.S. This weekend I will continue to speak out about changing course in Iraq. Please tune in to the Democratic radio address on Saturday and to my interview on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos" Sunday morning.



To: geode00 who wrote (98873)2/10/2007 11:02:55 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 362403
 
Live Coverage of the Obama Campaign Speech -- on MSNBC right now <eom>.



To: geode00 who wrote (98873)2/11/2007 1:30:45 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362403
 
Rudy's problem is he's NOT conservative enough for the GOP base and he's got lots of baggage -- eg. 3 marriages and a shady business background...McCain has hired some of Rove's dirty tricksters and they will smear Rudy...this is from the conservative Forbes magazine and you may see some of it come out in the campaign...

The Company He Keeps

members.forbes.com

By Nathan Vardi 11.13.06

As a businessman, he's been mixing with a sketchier crowd.

Rudolph W. Giuliani sprinted through October as if he were running for national office. He was, of course, campaigning for other Republican candidates--popping up, over a period of ten days, in Detroit; Schaumburg, Ill.; Portland, Ore.; Seattle; New York City; Mystic, Conn.; Concord, N.H.; Providence, R.I.; and Stamford, Conn. Wherever he went, Giuliani was the main attraction. The crowds didn't want to hear much about election 2006; they wanted to know if Rudy was planning to run for president in 2008. "I'll make the decision sometime next year," he announced in New Hampshire. Is the outcome in doubt?

Giuliani is the closest thing in America to a mythic hero. His reputation was forged in the refiner's fire of Sept. 11, which burned away the dross of what had been a successful but contentious two terms as New York City's mayor, a guy who reduced crime, yet picked fights with squeegee men and jaywalkers. In the aftermath of the attacks Giuliani rose to become a transcendent figure of compassion and strength whose courage was acknowledged by Queen Elizabeth II, who gave him an honorary knighthood, and Time magazine, which made him its "Person of the Year" in 2001. That image has helped Giuliani become the most popular politician in the U.S.; recent polls show him leading all contenders--Republicans and Democrats--who are contemplating a run at the White House.

Since leaving office in early 2002, Giuliani has been winning more than political capital. While battling prostate cancer (he won that war) and raising hell in a very public divorce (he is now married to Judith Nathan, his third wife), he has been banking millions of dollars a year. His Leadership (Talk Miramax Books, 2002) figured in an estimated $3 million in advances for two books. He earns as much as $8 million a year on the speaking circuit (FORBES hired him to speak at a conference last year). Giuliani Partners, a management consultancy that oversees Giuliani Security & Safety and Giuliani Capital, has nabbed tens of millions of dollars in contracts and deals.

Rudy is hardly the first ex-pol to cash in on his name. The revolving door between the government and the private sector has always moved briskly. Giuliani Partners was set up to make money and "do good," says Michael D. Hess, a partner and a former Giuliani administration official. "I think people are attracted to the organization because of the image of leadership and trust and integrity," says Steven D. Oesterle, a partner and managing director of the firm. Question is, have Giuliani's moneymaking efforts buffed or tarnished the gold-plated name?

There have been white-shoe clients. Giuliani Partners has advised the likes of insurer Aon (nyse: AOC - news - people ), CB Richard Ellis, the real estate services firm, and Entergy (nyse: ETR - news - people ), the giant New Orleans utility. Nextel Communications (nyse: S - news - people ) paid Giuliani Partners 1.2 million stock options with an exercise price of $4.50. The firm says it sold out at a profit, but before the shares rose to $33 in August 2005, when Nextel was bought by Sprint. It also points to its work for U.S. Foodservice, helping the unit of the disgraced Dutch grocery chain Royal Ahold overcome its accounting and legal headaches.

But there have also been plenty of scuffed-shoe customers. Giuliani Partners and its units have repeatedly become entangled in petty deals that seem unworthy of someone with national aspirations. It has accepted fees from companies with over-the-counter penny stocks, made alliances that have gone nowhere or made little financial sense and engaged with businesses and individuals who have come under scrutiny by regulatory and law enforcement officials. Such associations are astonishing for this tough, Brooklyn-born prosecutor who nailed gangsters like Paul Castellano and white-collar felons like Marc Rich, Ivan Boesky and Michael Milken. It's the sort of carelessness that suggests either poor judgment or inattention. "We do this very careful due diligence," says Hess. "We would never get involved in anything that is at all shady or risky or questionable."

Perhaps Rudy Giuliani the businessman delegates too much. At the firm, he relies on a tight inner circle: Most of the nine partners are veterans of the Giuliani administration. One former executive, onetime NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik, has been a conspicuous embarrassment. Kerik joined Giuliani Partners in 2002 and headed the security unit, then known as Giuliani-Kerik. President Bush in 2004 nominated Kerik to head up the Department of Homeland Security. Kerik withdrew his name on the pretext of having once hired a nanny who may have been an undocumented alien. He resigned and sold his shares of Giuliani-Kerik. In June Kerik pleaded guilty to two misdemeanors, admitting that while he was a public official he accepted $165,000 in apartment renovations from a contractor. He also admitted that he failed to report a $28,000 loan from a real estate developer and agreed to pay $221,000 in fines.

Still, Giuliani has continued to permit those closest to him to drag his name into potentially compromising situations. Example: the agreement with Lighting Science Group, a Dallas firm whose shares trade on the o-t-c bulletin board. The deal came to Giuliani last year through Roy W. Bailey, the former finance chairman of the Texas Republican Party and current Giuliani Partners managing director. "I have known Roy for 20 years," says Ronald Lusk, Lighting Science's chief, who agreed to pay Giuliani Capital, for help in raising money and finding clients, $150,000, plus a warrant to purchase 1.6 million shares at 60 cents.

Shares of the company, which proposes to finance LED (light-emitting diode) lights for parking garages, recently traded for 25 cents. Lighting Science and Giuliani Capital have also set up a joint venture to split whatever energy savings parking garages eke out on their utility bills from LEDs the company gives them gratis. This is the third incarnation of Lusk's enterprise (it lost $412,000 on $137,000 of revenue for the six months ending June 30): It started out as a nursing home operator, then morphed into a data management business that wound up in bankruptcy court in 2002 before finding new life in lights. "We like the technology," says Oesterle.

Friendship also dragged Giuliani into Command Security, another o-t-c bulletin board stock, which rents out security guards and lost $100,000 on $85 million of revenue in the year ended Mar. 31. Bruce Galloway, Command's chairman and chief backer, also runs the $45 million (assets) Galloway Capital Management in New York. To snag Giuliani, Galloway turned to a business associate, Richard Chwatt, co-owner of Jericho State Capital in Boca Raton, Fla. "Richard Chwatt's wife is very, very dear friends with [Rudy Giuliani's wife] Judith Nathan, and that's how we got the relationship," says Galloway. Not so, says, Giuliani's Hess: "The business, I do know, did not come about through the social relationship of the two women."

For a year's work--revising the employee manual, introducing new clients, having Giuliani host a breakfast at Manhattan's Yale Club--Giuliani Security & Safety will earn $2.1 million. Chwatt was rewarded for making the introduction: Jericho State Capital got $90,000 and a warrant for 350,000 shares exercisable at $2 (shares now trade for $2.60), and will receive $7,500 a month and a warrant for 150,000 additional shares if the contract is renewed, which is "likely," says Galloway.

cont. here:

members.forbes.com