KARL ROVE: WORSE THAN OSAMA BIN LADEN - Yahoo! News
bg: a lot wrong with this piece (related to bin Laden). Alex Jones covered today.
Wednesday, July 06, 2005
"Iraqi Complicity in the World Trade Center Bombing and Beyond " (June 2001)
"Iraqi Complicity in the World Trade Center Bombing and Beyond " (June 2001)
BG: Just reviewing an article that could be part of the Case against Saddam.... (she seems to leave out the complicity of the FBI with the 1993 Bombing....)
BG: Just reviewing an article that could be part of the Case against Saddam.... (she seems to leave out the complicity of the FBI with the 1993 Bombing....)
Techdirt:Security Companies Accused Of Sending Phish-Alike Emails
Techdirt:Security Companies Accused Of Sending Phish-Alike Emails
from the no-wonder-security-is-so-weak dept.
We've been amazed in the past to see that well known banks still hadn't realized that they need to be very careful not to use the tricks that phishers use, such as pointing people to unclear domain names, or anything else that might suggest the email is a fake. Even worse, though, is this new story suggesting that even some top security firms are guilty of the same thing. These firms, which claim they have the knowledge and security skills to protect you, can't even take the time to recognize that their own emails carry many of the trademarks of a standard phishing email, such as masked URLs. Of course, given the recent report that the biggest threat for security holes may be security software products themselves, maybe it's not such a surprise.
from the no-wonder-security-is-so-weak dept.
We've been amazed in the past to see that well known banks still hadn't realized that they need to be very careful not to use the tricks that phishers use, such as pointing people to unclear domain names, or anything else that might suggest the email is a fake. Even worse, though, is this new story suggesting that even some top security firms are guilty of the same thing. These firms, which claim they have the knowledge and security skills to protect you, can't even take the time to recognize that their own emails carry many of the trademarks of a standard phishing email, such as masked URLs. Of course, given the recent report that the biggest threat for security holes may be security software products themselves, maybe it's not such a surprise.
The Claim: Remove a Tick From Your Skin by Burning It - New York Times
The Claim: Remove a Tick From Your Skin by Burning It - New York Times
July 5, 2005
The Claim: Remove a Tick From Your Skin by Burning It
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR
THE FACTS Ever notice a tiny speck on your skin and then discover that what looked like a piece of dirt was actually a tick? For most people, that moment is about the only time exposing an arm or a leg to an open flame can seem like a good idea.
But while burning a tick into submission is probably the most popular removal method, studies show that it can also be the worst. Getting the tick out as quickly as possible is crucial, since the likelihood of contracting Lyme disease or another infection rises steeply after 24 hours. But traumatizing the insect with heat or too much force also carries the risk of making it regurgitate, further increasing the likelihood of infection.
In 1996, a team of Spanish researchers studied 52 patients who sought treatment at a hospital after extracting a tick. They found that those who accomplished this by squeezing, crushing or burning the insects were far more likely to develop symptoms of Lyme disease or other complications than those who used the proper removal method: grasping the pest as close to the skin as possible with tweezers and then gently pulling it straight up.
Any remaining pieces should be pulled out and the site should be cleaned with a disinfectant.
Smothering Vaseline or nail polish on the tick is also a bad idea, since it can be hours before it dies from suffocation. As a precautionary step, some doctors also recommend taking antibiotics to ward off infection.
THE BOTTOM LINE Never remove a tick by burning it.
scitimes@nytimes.com
July 5, 2005
The Claim: Remove a Tick From Your Skin by Burning It
By ANAHAD O'CONNOR
THE FACTS Ever notice a tiny speck on your skin and then discover that what looked like a piece of dirt was actually a tick? For most people, that moment is about the only time exposing an arm or a leg to an open flame can seem like a good idea.
But while burning a tick into submission is probably the most popular removal method, studies show that it can also be the worst. Getting the tick out as quickly as possible is crucial, since the likelihood of contracting Lyme disease or another infection rises steeply after 24 hours. But traumatizing the insect with heat or too much force also carries the risk of making it regurgitate, further increasing the likelihood of infection.
In 1996, a team of Spanish researchers studied 52 patients who sought treatment at a hospital after extracting a tick. They found that those who accomplished this by squeezing, crushing or burning the insects were far more likely to develop symptoms of Lyme disease or other complications than those who used the proper removal method: grasping the pest as close to the skin as possible with tweezers and then gently pulling it straight up.
Any remaining pieces should be pulled out and the site should be cleaned with a disinfectant.
Smothering Vaseline or nail polish on the tick is also a bad idea, since it can be hours before it dies from suffocation. As a precautionary step, some doctors also recommend taking antibiotics to ward off infection.
THE BOTTOM LINE Never remove a tick by burning it.
scitimes@nytimes.com
A Pat on the Back - New York Times
A Pat on the Back - New York Times
July 6, 2005
A Pat on the Back
By SARAH VOWELL
Since I have been hired, temporarily, to write about the news, here's some: seeing Pat Robertson on television cheered me up. Until recently, about the nicest thing I would have said about this televangelist is that he isn't boring. Remember when he wanted to boycott the "Satanic ritual" that is Halloween? Or when he said, "The husband is the head of the wife"? Or when he warned the city of Orlando that the flying of homosexuals' upbeat rainbow flags might incite divine retribution in the form of hurricanes or "possibly a meteor"? Yep, good times.
Nevertheless, when I spotted Robertson in a lineup of celebrities including Brad Pitt, Bono, George Clooney and the also-never-boring Dennis Hopper, I was delighted to see him. He was in the One Campaign's television ad asking for help in the crusade against poverty, starvation and AIDS in Africa and elsewhere.
In the commercial, Robertson says, "Americans have an unprecedented opportunity," and then Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, of all people, finishes his sentence, concluding that "we can make history."
On a recent "Nightline," Robertson showed up with his new best friend, Clooney. When asked if his group Operation Blessing would promote "the responsible use of condoms" along with abstinence in its AIDS education program in Africa, Robertson answered, "Absolutely." Pat Robertson!
"I just don't think we can close our eyes to human nature," he continued, adding that with regard to teaching proper condom use, "you have to do that, given the magnitude." I could have hugged him.
Robertson is one of the people in this dream I've had for 20 years, a nightmare I call "the handshake dream." In it, I am attending some G.O.P. all-star party. (A girl can dream.) And I have to decide whose hand I deign to shake. Bob Dole and John McCain: of course (war heroes). Orrin Hatch: fine (stem cells). But Robertson? He's always been a solid "No way!" as he sulks by the punch bowl with Strom.
Seeing Robertson in that commercial with Bono - and Bono's hair - is a little like listening to Paul Anka's new recording of Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit." At first, it's jarring to hear the guy who wrote "Puppy Love" for Donny Osmond sing Kurt Cobain's lyrics: "a mosquito, my libido." But listen hard and you can hear what Anka hears. He doesn't hear the ranting of weirdos. He hears the poetry, the architecture of a justifiably standard song like "Autumn in New York," like "Fly Me to the Moon."
My soft spot for strange bedfellows aside, I am a capital-D Democrat who still believes in the value of partisan politics. And I hold onto that belief despite the fact that I belong to a party whose only true talent is writing exceedingly eloquent concession speeches.
On Monday, anticipating an epic dust-up regarding his new nominee for the Supreme Court, President Bush said he hoped that special-interest groups on both sides would "tone down the heated rhetoric." They shouldn't, though.
This is about the lifetime appointment of a person who will be making life and death decisions for millions of people for decades to come, not about some petty time waster like - come on, again? - flag burning. It's so important that we should agree to melt together on the slopes of a Kilauea of issue-ad spew.
Not every public problem, however, is Roe-v.-Wade and lifetime-appointment complex. Some problems are as black and white as the photography in that silvery One Campaign ad Robertson is in. "Every three seconds, one person dies," the ad says. And so it was repeated at the Live 8 concert by performers hoping to get the attention of the men in Scotland today for the G-8 summit meeting.
That fact, that every three seconds an African human being dies from hunger or AIDS or, honestly, mosquito bites in this day and age, is literally the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Way, way, way dumber than that thing about Orlando and a meteor from God. That every-three-seconds statistic is so moronic, and having the richest countries in the world do something about it is such a total no-brainer, that Pat Robertson will join up with Dennis-bloody-Hopper of "Blue"-bloody-"Velvet" to spread the word.
I don't know what will happen in Scotland today. But I do know that tonight, if I have the handshake dream - Pat Robertson, put 'er there.
Maureen Dowd is on book leave.
Sarah Vowell, a contributor to public radio's "This American Life," is the author, most recently, of "Assassination Vacation."
July 6, 2005
A Pat on the Back
By SARAH VOWELL
Since I have been hired, temporarily, to write about the news, here's some: seeing Pat Robertson on television cheered me up. Until recently, about the nicest thing I would have said about this televangelist is that he isn't boring. Remember when he wanted to boycott the "Satanic ritual" that is Halloween? Or when he said, "The husband is the head of the wife"? Or when he warned the city of Orlando that the flying of homosexuals' upbeat rainbow flags might incite divine retribution in the form of hurricanes or "possibly a meteor"? Yep, good times.
Nevertheless, when I spotted Robertson in a lineup of celebrities including Brad Pitt, Bono, George Clooney and the also-never-boring Dennis Hopper, I was delighted to see him. He was in the One Campaign's television ad asking for help in the crusade against poverty, starvation and AIDS in Africa and elsewhere.
In the commercial, Robertson says, "Americans have an unprecedented opportunity," and then Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, of all people, finishes his sentence, concluding that "we can make history."
On a recent "Nightline," Robertson showed up with his new best friend, Clooney. When asked if his group Operation Blessing would promote "the responsible use of condoms" along with abstinence in its AIDS education program in Africa, Robertson answered, "Absolutely." Pat Robertson!
"I just don't think we can close our eyes to human nature," he continued, adding that with regard to teaching proper condom use, "you have to do that, given the magnitude." I could have hugged him.
Robertson is one of the people in this dream I've had for 20 years, a nightmare I call "the handshake dream." In it, I am attending some G.O.P. all-star party. (A girl can dream.) And I have to decide whose hand I deign to shake. Bob Dole and John McCain: of course (war heroes). Orrin Hatch: fine (stem cells). But Robertson? He's always been a solid "No way!" as he sulks by the punch bowl with Strom.
Seeing Robertson in that commercial with Bono - and Bono's hair - is a little like listening to Paul Anka's new recording of Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit." At first, it's jarring to hear the guy who wrote "Puppy Love" for Donny Osmond sing Kurt Cobain's lyrics: "a mosquito, my libido." But listen hard and you can hear what Anka hears. He doesn't hear the ranting of weirdos. He hears the poetry, the architecture of a justifiably standard song like "Autumn in New York," like "Fly Me to the Moon."
My soft spot for strange bedfellows aside, I am a capital-D Democrat who still believes in the value of partisan politics. And I hold onto that belief despite the fact that I belong to a party whose only true talent is writing exceedingly eloquent concession speeches.
On Monday, anticipating an epic dust-up regarding his new nominee for the Supreme Court, President Bush said he hoped that special-interest groups on both sides would "tone down the heated rhetoric." They shouldn't, though.
This is about the lifetime appointment of a person who will be making life and death decisions for millions of people for decades to come, not about some petty time waster like - come on, again? - flag burning. It's so important that we should agree to melt together on the slopes of a Kilauea of issue-ad spew.
Not every public problem, however, is Roe-v.-Wade and lifetime-appointment complex. Some problems are as black and white as the photography in that silvery One Campaign ad Robertson is in. "Every three seconds, one person dies," the ad says. And so it was repeated at the Live 8 concert by performers hoping to get the attention of the men in Scotland today for the G-8 summit meeting.
That fact, that every three seconds an African human being dies from hunger or AIDS or, honestly, mosquito bites in this day and age, is literally the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Way, way, way dumber than that thing about Orlando and a meteor from God. That every-three-seconds statistic is so moronic, and having the richest countries in the world do something about it is such a total no-brainer, that Pat Robertson will join up with Dennis-bloody-Hopper of "Blue"-bloody-"Velvet" to spread the word.
I don't know what will happen in Scotland today. But I do know that tonight, if I have the handshake dream - Pat Robertson, put 'er there.
Maureen Dowd is on book leave.
Sarah Vowell, a contributor to public radio's "This American Life," is the author, most recently, of "Assassination Vacation."
TCS: Tech Central Station - To Really Stop Smoking
TCS: Tech Central Station - To Really Stop Smoking
BG: Simply inane. What incredibly disjointed, weak, contorted argument.
BG: Simply inane. What incredibly disjointed, weak, contorted argument.
Bush defends detainee treatment at Guanantamo - Yahoo! News
Bush defends detainee treatment at Guanantamo - Yahoo! News: "suspects are labeled 'enemy combatants,' something the OSCE report called a legal nonentity under international law. "
The Free Press -- Independent News Media - Bob Fitrakis
The Free Press -- Independent News Media - Bob Fitrakis
“This was especially true in the city of Columbus,” but refuse to attribute it to the “allocation of machines.”
“This was especially true in the city of Columbus,” but refuse to attribute it to the “allocation of machines.”
Video: Video of 911 Truth
Ruppert, Mariani, Deception Dollar, Phil Berg, Pearl Harbor, Carol Brouillet, Barrie Zwicker
Casualties and Causalities - How to ruin an occupation. By Christopher Hitchens
Casualties and Causalities - How to ruin an occupation. By Christopher�Hitchens
fighting words
Casualties and Causalities
How to ruin an occupation.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Tuesday, July 5, 2005, at 9:28 AM PT
Hannah Allam's moving obituary for Yasser Salihee, one of Knight Ridder's Iraqi correspondents in Baghdad, would be upsetting enough on its own if it were not for two additional considerations. The first is that Yasser Salihee joins a list of three intrepid Iraqi reporters and broadcasters killed in Baghdad last week. The second is that all three were slain by American fire. Ahmed Wael Bakri, the program director at al-Sharqiya TV, and Maha Ibrahim, a reporter for the same network, were both shot seemingly either for coming too close to American soldiers, or for misinterpreting signals or gestures from them.
These brave people were not murdered or targeted, or else slaughtered indiscriminately, as would be the case if they had been victims of the al-Qaida-Baath alliance. But it would not be entirely correct to say that their deaths were quite accidental, either. They were victims of a policy of "force protection" that mandates Americans to treat any questionable action or movement with "zero tolerance." It's a moral certainty that many more Iraqi citizens die this way than are ever reported.
I have been very reliably assured that the British commander, Gen. Michael Jackson, has privately told his American counterparts that if they go on in this manner they will risk losing Iraq. I am not one of those Brits who likes to bang on too much about the superiority of English tact and restraint over Yankee brashness. And, though it is true that British-held Basra has got its pulse back much sooner than Baghdad, and is displaying other vital signs as well, the task of keeping order in a Shi'a majority city is clearly an easier one. Nonetheless, there must be something to Jackson's belief that soldiering also involves a degree of visible fraternization and a willingness to go on the streets with Iraqi police and civilians, rather than gesture at them from inside a space-suit or armored vehicle, and then shoot them dead if they don't get it right the first time.
But the truly sobering reflection is that crimes and blunders of this kind are committed, in effect, by popular demand. It is emphasized every day that Americans do not want to read about dead soldiers. So it is arranged that, as far as possible, they will read (or perhaps not bother to read) about dead civilians instead. This is the price that a "body-bag" mentality exacts. Incidentally, when is the New York Times going to start running a "Names of the Dead" regular feature from Afghanistan? And how long will it be, as the Taliban forces try for a comeback, before we hear demands for a deadline for withdrawal from Kabul as well? If "quagmirism" has its logic one way, then it has it the other way, too (unless you don't believe that retreat also has its quagmires).
The enemy has understood our domestic and insular mentality from the beginning. I call your attention to a report in the London Independent from Patrick Cockburn, published on Dec. 1, 2004. I should say that Cockburn is an old friend of mine, an extremely brave veteran of Iraqi reportage for three decades, and no admirer—to say the very least—of the war or the occupation. He reprinted a letter from Naji Sabri, Saddam Hussein's foreign minister, to his supreme leader. It is dated five days before the fall of Baghdad. In the letter, Sabri expresses concern that world opinion is receiving an impression of too much fraternization between Iraqis and American forces. A cure for this, he argues, is "to target their vehicle checkpoints with suicide operations by civilian vehicles in order to make the savage Americans realize that their contact with Iraqi civilians is as dangerous as facing them on the battlefield."
This delightful suggestion possesses many points of interest. It demonstrates that the Baath Party already had organized links with jihadist suicide bombers. And it shows a cruel but shrewd understanding of how public opinion, and indeed American policy, might be forcibly altered. (It also illustrates the stony evil of the Saddam regime and its fedayeen, which at about that time also publicly hanged a woman who had applauded the arrival of coalition forces in Nasariyah. One would not need to emphasize this if it were not for those who sneer every day at the idea that Coalition troops were greeted as liberators. They often were. I saw it myself and will not be told that I did not see it. But the disincentive to such greeting was higher than the sneerers know.)
Military and civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan are a test of something beyond themselves. They are part of a design, by those who boastfully claim to be unmoved by killing or by being killed, to evoke in us an emotion that they themselves negate. This terrible quandary cannot be escaped by leaving our civilian allies unprotected, let alone by shooting them if they don't wave quickly enough.
******
A near-perfect statement of the opposite view—that the root cause of Islamic fundamentalism is provided by the resistance to it—comes in a letter to the July 4 edition of the New Republic. The author, professor Joseph Ellis of Mount Holyoke College, inquires why it is that we do not follow a strategy of "containment" as adumbrated by the late George Kennan. Why waste time on Ellis' false analogy, since the proper comparison would be between jihadism and the irrational death-wish of fascism? But the good professor inadvertently answers his own query. He wants to know "why have we chosen to attack it [Islamic fanaticism] frontally in its own homeland?" Well, perhaps because—like the Axis powers but unlike Stalin—it "chose" to attack us in ours. As with Ellis' reckless fabrication of his own military record, a question as naive as this seems subliminally designed to expose the denied but unwelcome truth.
******
Saddam Hussein was so deluded and deranged during the final days of his despotism that he spent time writing, or dictating, another of his pulp novels. Titled Get Out Damned One—hardly a polite way of suggesting a date for withdrawal—the adventure story invokes a mythic Arab hero who "invades the land of the enemy and topples one of their monumental towers." More wish-thinking, I dare say.
Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair. His most recent book is Thomas Jefferson: Author of America.
Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2121996/
fighting words
Casualties and Causalities
How to ruin an occupation.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Tuesday, July 5, 2005, at 9:28 AM PT
Hannah Allam's moving obituary for Yasser Salihee, one of Knight Ridder's Iraqi correspondents in Baghdad, would be upsetting enough on its own if it were not for two additional considerations. The first is that Yasser Salihee joins a list of three intrepid Iraqi reporters and broadcasters killed in Baghdad last week. The second is that all three were slain by American fire. Ahmed Wael Bakri, the program director at al-Sharqiya TV, and Maha Ibrahim, a reporter for the same network, were both shot seemingly either for coming too close to American soldiers, or for misinterpreting signals or gestures from them.
These brave people were not murdered or targeted, or else slaughtered indiscriminately, as would be the case if they had been victims of the al-Qaida-Baath alliance. But it would not be entirely correct to say that their deaths were quite accidental, either. They were victims of a policy of "force protection" that mandates Americans to treat any questionable action or movement with "zero tolerance." It's a moral certainty that many more Iraqi citizens die this way than are ever reported.
I have been very reliably assured that the British commander, Gen. Michael Jackson, has privately told his American counterparts that if they go on in this manner they will risk losing Iraq. I am not one of those Brits who likes to bang on too much about the superiority of English tact and restraint over Yankee brashness. And, though it is true that British-held Basra has got its pulse back much sooner than Baghdad, and is displaying other vital signs as well, the task of keeping order in a Shi'a majority city is clearly an easier one. Nonetheless, there must be something to Jackson's belief that soldiering also involves a degree of visible fraternization and a willingness to go on the streets with Iraqi police and civilians, rather than gesture at them from inside a space-suit or armored vehicle, and then shoot them dead if they don't get it right the first time.
But the truly sobering reflection is that crimes and blunders of this kind are committed, in effect, by popular demand. It is emphasized every day that Americans do not want to read about dead soldiers. So it is arranged that, as far as possible, they will read (or perhaps not bother to read) about dead civilians instead. This is the price that a "body-bag" mentality exacts. Incidentally, when is the New York Times going to start running a "Names of the Dead" regular feature from Afghanistan? And how long will it be, as the Taliban forces try for a comeback, before we hear demands for a deadline for withdrawal from Kabul as well? If "quagmirism" has its logic one way, then it has it the other way, too (unless you don't believe that retreat also has its quagmires).
The enemy has understood our domestic and insular mentality from the beginning. I call your attention to a report in the London Independent from Patrick Cockburn, published on Dec. 1, 2004. I should say that Cockburn is an old friend of mine, an extremely brave veteran of Iraqi reportage for three decades, and no admirer—to say the very least—of the war or the occupation. He reprinted a letter from Naji Sabri, Saddam Hussein's foreign minister, to his supreme leader. It is dated five days before the fall of Baghdad. In the letter, Sabri expresses concern that world opinion is receiving an impression of too much fraternization between Iraqis and American forces. A cure for this, he argues, is "to target their vehicle checkpoints with suicide operations by civilian vehicles in order to make the savage Americans realize that their contact with Iraqi civilians is as dangerous as facing them on the battlefield."
This delightful suggestion possesses many points of interest. It demonstrates that the Baath Party already had organized links with jihadist suicide bombers. And it shows a cruel but shrewd understanding of how public opinion, and indeed American policy, might be forcibly altered. (It also illustrates the stony evil of the Saddam regime and its fedayeen, which at about that time also publicly hanged a woman who had applauded the arrival of coalition forces in Nasariyah. One would not need to emphasize this if it were not for those who sneer every day at the idea that Coalition troops were greeted as liberators. They often were. I saw it myself and will not be told that I did not see it. But the disincentive to such greeting was higher than the sneerers know.)
Military and civilian casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan are a test of something beyond themselves. They are part of a design, by those who boastfully claim to be unmoved by killing or by being killed, to evoke in us an emotion that they themselves negate. This terrible quandary cannot be escaped by leaving our civilian allies unprotected, let alone by shooting them if they don't wave quickly enough.
******
A near-perfect statement of the opposite view—that the root cause of Islamic fundamentalism is provided by the resistance to it—comes in a letter to the July 4 edition of the New Republic. The author, professor Joseph Ellis of Mount Holyoke College, inquires why it is that we do not follow a strategy of "containment" as adumbrated by the late George Kennan. Why waste time on Ellis' false analogy, since the proper comparison would be between jihadism and the irrational death-wish of fascism? But the good professor inadvertently answers his own query. He wants to know "why have we chosen to attack it [Islamic fanaticism] frontally in its own homeland?" Well, perhaps because—like the Axis powers but unlike Stalin—it "chose" to attack us in ours. As with Ellis' reckless fabrication of his own military record, a question as naive as this seems subliminally designed to expose the denied but unwelcome truth.
******
Saddam Hussein was so deluded and deranged during the final days of his despotism that he spent time writing, or dictating, another of his pulp novels. Titled Get Out Damned One—hardly a polite way of suggesting a date for withdrawal—the adventure story invokes a mythic Arab hero who "invades the land of the enemy and topples one of their monumental towers." More wish-thinking, I dare say.
Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair. His most recent book is Thomas Jefferson: Author of America.
Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2121996/
Target: AIG - Fraud probe of Maurice "Hank" Greenberg intensifies
Target: AIG - Fraud probe of Maurice "Hank" Greenberg intensifies
[American International Group is the latest in a series of large-scale enterprises whose fraudulent accounting practices have recently seen the light of day. AIG is a very big fish, not only because of the quantities of money involved but because of long-standing connections to US intelligence. This is deep stuff, reaching back to the Vietnam War, the Philippines, and the post-1989 looting of Russia. Chin provides abundant sources and links - a timely exposé. - JAH]
Target: AIG
Fraud probe of Maurice "Hank" Greenberg intensifies
By
Larry Chin
© Copyright 2005, From The Wilderness Publications, www.fromthewilderness.com. All Rights Reserved. This story may NOT be posted on any Internet web site without express written permission. Contact admin@copvcia.com. May be circulated, distributed or transmitted for non-profit purposes only.
July 1, 2005 1300 PST (FTW) American International Group's Maurice "Hank" Greenberg
[American International Group is the latest in a series of large-scale enterprises whose fraudulent accounting practices have recently seen the light of day. AIG is a very big fish, not only because of the quantities of money involved but because of long-standing connections to US intelligence. This is deep stuff, reaching back to the Vietnam War, the Philippines, and the post-1989 looting of Russia. Chin provides abundant sources and links - a timely exposé. - JAH]
Target: AIG
Fraud probe of Maurice "Hank" Greenberg intensifies
By
Larry Chin
© Copyright 2005, From The Wilderness Publications, www.fromthewilderness.com. All Rights Reserved. This story may NOT be posted on any Internet web site without express written permission. Contact admin@copvcia.com. May be circulated, distributed or transmitted for non-profit purposes only.
July 1, 2005 1300 PST (FTW) American International Group's Maurice "Hank" Greenberg
Rumsfeld provokes China, CNOOC eyes Unocal, Kissinger checks balance sheet
Rumsfeld provokes China, CNOOC eyes Unocal, Kissinger checks balance sheet
Rumsfeld provokes China, CNOOC eyes Unocal, Kissinger checks balance sheet
By Larry Chin
© Copyright 2005, From The Wilderness Publications, www.fromthewilderness.com. All Rights Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web site for non-profit purposes only.
More evidence of emerging Cold War between the US and China has exploded this week, as Donald Rumsfeld issued new threats towards China regarding its expanding military. The Chinese have responded with predictable fury (See "Rumsfeld and US irrationalism".) Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan entered the fray, alluding to East-West financial warfare involving the outflow of foreign investments and harm to the dollar, and repeating the Wall Street mantra that China must float its currency.
Meanwhile, the Sino-US race for oil ("China's Global Hunt for Oil") continues to ramp up, as China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) is positioning for bid for Unocal. (Latest update here.)
It may seem ironic that Chinese oil interests are poised to acquire the company that was (along with the myriad other machinations over Central Asian oil and gas pipelines) central to the buildup to 9/11, the ensuing "war on terrorism", and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. (Unocal's role is exhaustively detailed in Ahmed Rashid's Taliban, Forbidden Truth by Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, and summarized in "Unocal and the Afghanistan pipeline".)
But maybe it is not so ironic.
Henry Kissinger, a former Unocal consultant deeply involved in the pre-9/11 pipeline consortium, sits on CNOOC's international board, which he joined in October 2001. Essentially, Kissinger has been on both sides of the oil deal for years, from CentGas/Central Asia to whatever comes of CNOOC's play for Unocal.
While the flames of world war burn, true inner circle elites like Kissinger play all sides, up and down, profiting all along the way.
Rumsfeld provokes China, CNOOC eyes Unocal, Kissinger checks balance sheet
By Larry Chin
© Copyright 2005, From The Wilderness Publications, www.fromthewilderness.com. All Rights Reserved. May be reprinted, distributed or posted on an Internet web site for non-profit purposes only.
More evidence of emerging Cold War between the US and China has exploded this week, as Donald Rumsfeld issued new threats towards China regarding its expanding military. The Chinese have responded with predictable fury (See "Rumsfeld and US irrationalism".) Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan entered the fray, alluding to East-West financial warfare involving the outflow of foreign investments and harm to the dollar, and repeating the Wall Street mantra that China must float its currency.
Meanwhile, the Sino-US race for oil ("China's Global Hunt for Oil") continues to ramp up, as China National Offshore Oil Corporation (CNOOC) is positioning for bid for Unocal. (Latest update here.)
It may seem ironic that Chinese oil interests are poised to acquire the company that was (along with the myriad other machinations over Central Asian oil and gas pipelines) central to the buildup to 9/11, the ensuing "war on terrorism", and the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. (Unocal's role is exhaustively detailed in Ahmed Rashid's Taliban, Forbidden Truth by Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, and summarized in "Unocal and the Afghanistan pipeline".)
But maybe it is not so ironic.
Henry Kissinger, a former Unocal consultant deeply involved in the pre-9/11 pipeline consortium, sits on CNOOC's international board, which he joined in October 2001. Essentially, Kissinger has been on both sides of the oil deal for years, from CentGas/Central Asia to whatever comes of CNOOC's play for Unocal.
While the flames of world war burn, true inner circle elites like Kissinger play all sides, up and down, profiting all along the way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)