Pat Thurston's Radio Weblog :
Updated: 3/1/06; 10:19:06 AM.

 

Subscribe to "Pat Thurston's Radio Weblog" in Radio UserLand.

Click to see the XML version of this web page.

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.

 
 

Monday, February 27, 2006

Marty Kaplan: Soft Bigotry, Hard Bucks.

Looks like no contractor is being left behind, either. Dick Cheney's corporate alma mater is the most recent victim of the soft bigotry of low expectations.

Turns out that Halliburton will get nearly all of the quarter-of-a-billion dollars in excessive or unjustified Iraq charges that the Pentagon's auditors uncovered. According to a New York Times story, Halliburton did "as well as could be expected" with its $2.41 billion no-bid contract; said an Army spokesperson, "the contractor is not required to perform perfectly to be entitled to reimbursement."

If I were Ken Mehlman (I can't believe I just typed that), I'd grab and run with this below-sea-level standard. The Republicans who run Washington shouldn't be required to perform perfectly to be entitled to stay in power. Iraq? Katrina? Energy independence? Ethics? As long as the GOP does as well as could be expected on those fronts -- that is, abysmally, miserably, incompetently and criminally -- then they should enjoy the same kid-glove treatment that Halliburton's getting.

But why stop there? Don't the Administration and Congress deserve a performance bonus each time one among them is indicted? Since we expect them to be morally corrupt, ideologically fanatical, culturally divisive and constitutionally unaccountable, surely they're as entitled to social promotions as those incurious and illiterate students who were nevertheless pushed along toward graduation at low-bar institutions like Andover and Yale.

[The Huffington Post | Full Blog Feed]
11:22:42 AM    comment []

Deepak Chopra: "We Only Torture the Bad Guys".

The first photos from Abu Ghraib prison were released in 2003, and much of America has done its best to forget them. Now that a new batch has surfaced, the administration is wheeling out its old excuses about enlisted personnel acting on their own, the need to stop showing the photos lest they inflame violence around the world, and so on. In truth, not only was Abu Ghraib torture deeply immoral--and obviously planned by those in charge--but suppressing the photos is just as immoral.

It's as if the U.S. had dropped the A-bomb on Hiroshima but didn't want anyone to see what it caused. The point of showing the horrors of Hiroshima to the world was to stir global conscience about never using nuclear weapons again. (I doubt that common citizens in Arab countries who are gleeful about the Islamic bomb have ever seen those sickening photos--they should.) The point of Abu Ghraib is the same. The U.S. should never condone torture again. The world should never forget that we used it here, and in a just society there would have been an immediate vote of no-confidence in the government that condones torture.

Instead, what we get is the self-justifying words "We only torture the bad guys." What makes this argument self-justifying is that someone is usually defined as "bad" because they were tortured in the first place; it's a label that covers all manner of sins. The administration is using the same reasoning over surveillance. If you call someone in the Middle East and we monitored you, you must be a suspicious character.

Of course, this is a tricky issue. There are Arab sympathizers of Al Qaida living in the U.S. , and one gets the impression that a casual sympathy may be the norm rather than the exception among Arab-Americans. But the administration is aggressively pursuing the erosion of human rights and humane values. They don't seem to be the people one would trust in delicate situations. The reality is that when a society is tempted to snoop and torture, cast suspicion and engender fear, the right people for the job show up. Clearly President Bush has surrounded himself with such people, forgetting that when civilization is at peril, the snoopers and torturers are the last ones that should be called upon. They constitute a risk to civilization on their own and a deep offense to morality that this generation of Americans will have to live with for a long time. Abu Ghraib is their My Lai.

Click: www.intentblog.com

[The Huffington Post | Full Blog Feed]
11:21:45 AM    comment []

RJ Eskow: Rancho Notorious Meets the Pentagon: Halliburton Shoots U.S. Army in the Face.

Unnamed Pentagon officials (wonder who?) rode roughshod over Army auditors and paid Halliburton for charges that were initially rejected by auditors as gross overbilling and mismanagement. That's a great financial boon for Dick Cheney, and very possibly for Katherine Armstrong's family too. I guess it's time for the U.S. Army to apologize to the Vice President, isn't it?

The New York Times and others report that although "questionable business practices ... had in some cases driven up the company's costs," unspecified Army officials had determined that "it had largely done as well as could be expected" and it would be paid nearly all the disputed amount.

For example, the Times reports that "the fuel transportation costs that the company was charging the Army were in some cases nearly triple what others were charging to do the same job." This is war profiteering, and it takes money away from where it's needed: to protect our soldiers in the field and heal them when they're wounded.

This is the same military, you will recall, that is trying to reject post-traumatic medical claims to lower its health expenses, has failed to provide adequate body armor, and is planning to give our troops the lowest salary increase since 1994.

Once again, the rules were bent for Cheney and his friends. The co-director of the postconflict reconstruction project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington called the decision "ridiculous," and the Times reports that other Pentagon audits were handled very differently. In cases where the Vice President doesn't benefit personally, the military withheld fees for Iraq contacts at annual averages that ranged from 56% to 72% since 2003.

And make no mistake about it: Cheney will profit personally. He was lying to the American public on "Meet The Press" in 2003 when he said:

"And since I left Halliburton to become George Bush's vice president, I've severed all my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my financial interest. I have no financial interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't had, now, for over three years."

He continues to receive "deferred salary" from the company and, more importantly, holds extensive unexercised stock options - 433,000 shares that have increased in value now that the company has evaded major penalty or prosecution.

Katherine Armstrong's mother Anne was on the Board of Directors of Halliburton when they decided to appoint Cheney to be CEO. It is highly possible that the Armstrong family still holds Halliburton shares. That might explain why Katherine was willing to file a police statement that now looks like it might be false - "there was no alcohol involved," she says in the report - based on her (and Cheney's) subsequent admissions that drinking had in fact taken place.

(And by the way - the police reports released last week did not include a statement from Cheney. If he also gave a statement indicating there had been no drinking, isn't it possible that an impeachable offense occurred? Not slandering, just asking: Where's the Cheney police statement?)

There should be an immediate investigation into whether Dick Cheney was involved in the decision to over-ride Army auditors, and into whether Halliburton committed any crimes in its handling of Iraq contracts. A special prosecutor would be appropriate, perhaps one with a broad enough mandate to investigate other possible Cheney crimes.

But, of course, Cheney is absolutely innocent in this whole matter. Those Army auditors who discovered Halliburton's malfeasance forgot to "announce their presence" as they approached the scene of the crime. They should've kept their heads low.

A Night Light

[The Huffington Post | Full Blog Feed]
11:20:28 AM    comment []

US rejects new UN human rights council. US rejects new UN human rights council [The Raw Story | A rational voice - Alternative news]
11:17:42 AM    comment []

Cyberthieves Silently Copy Your Passwords as You Type. Software that copies users' keystrokes and sends the information to crooks may be the next big trend in cybercrime. By TOM ZELLER Jr.. [NYT > Home Page]
11:14:27 AM    comment []

How a Deal Became a Big Liability for G.O.P.. Fueled by a backlash on talk radio and taunting by blogs and comedy shows, the outcry about Dubai Ports World became a bipartisan chorus leaders could not ignore. By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG. [NYT > Home Page]
11:13:45 AM    comment []

Guantanamo But Worse: #s At Bagram. Average length of stay of the approximately 500 prisoners kept in wire cages at Bagram Air Base , without any legal representation or ability to challenge their detention, in conditions described as "more bleak" than Guantanamo: 14.5 months... [TomPaine.com]
11:11:45 AM    comment []

© Copyright 2006 Patricia Thurston.



Click here to visit the Radio UserLand website.
 


February 2006
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28        
Jan   Mar