Letters to the Editor
-
[ot] The Biggest Scandal In Human History? Eh, Not So Much.
(Update on yesterday's story about neocons and personal accountability.)
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134858,00.html
FOXNEWS.COM HOME > SPECIAL REPORT W/ BRIT HUME
Friday, October 08, 2004
FRED BARNES: . . . Oil for Food scandal that was I think money wise, probably the biggest scandal in human history, has now become one of the biggest political scandals . . .
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: . . . And it is the biggest scandal in the history of the world . . .
- - "Special Report With Brit Hume"
http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2007/05/08/afx3696239.html
US oil group Chevron Corp is expected to admit it should have known kickbacks were being paid to Saddam Hussein for oil bought from Iraq as part of a UN programme, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing investigators.
The company is also facing a fine of between 25-30 mln usd as part of a settlement with US prosecutors, investigators, who declined to be named, told the newspaper.The Wall Street Journal said the fine, which is still being negotiated, would be the largest paid in the US in connection with the oil-for-food scandal.
- - Forbes
http://chevron.com/news/archive/chevron_press/2001/2001-01-16.asp
CHEVRON PRESS RELEASE ARCHIVES
SAN FRANCISCO, Jan. 16, 2001 -- Condoleezza Rice, a Chevron Corp. director since 1991, resigned from the company's board, effective Jan. 15. Rice was named President-elect George W. Bush's national security adviser-designate."Condi is extraordinarily capable," said Chairman Dave O'Reilly. "Her leadership skills and breadth of experience in government, academia and business have been a tremendous asset to Chevron and will serve her well in the new administration."
For the past two years Rice chaired the board's Public Policy Committee.
- - Chevron Corp.
Can you imagine what Brit Hume and Rush Limbaugh would be saying today, if it had been Nancy Pelosi on the board of Chevron?
-
@casual_observer
Actually, ex parte Milligan goes further than that, it says that the President can only suspend habeas corpus if the courts cannot function (what your article cited as "closed"), and must restore those rights to the parties for which it was suspended when the courts resume functioning. It doesn't say he can try them in lieu of the courts at all.
-
Jumping to conclusions.....
Its always unfortunate when people read WAY more into words than what the author intended. It's bad enough when a troll is using the technique to attack something someone didn't actually say but when it results in people who are actually on the same side getting distracted or hurt, then it's time to slow down long enough to actually read what is being said.
-
@ondelette
We really should have been asked to sacrifice, and the sacrifice that each and every American should have been asked to make is that we must live with being less safe, less secure, and less sure of ourselves and our future, in order to stand tall and say that we will not change our belief in civil and human rights and the rule of law, in what is right and what is wrong, no matter how many planes hit our buildings.
As did Londoners - indeed all England - during the blitz. Indeed it's what we should have done.
-
@ ondelette
Restoration of habeas corpus to the MCA status quo ante will not restore habeas corpus entirely because it was already circumscribed by the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, though less harshly than in the Military Commissions Act of 2006.
The vote in the Senate was 90-9. So much for blaming the battered wife.
Are you talking about Bush's signing statement to the bill or the bill itself? Because the nine dissenting votes on this bill that putatively banned inhumane treatment of prisoners were all vehemently pro-Bush Republicans: Wayne Allard (R-CO), Christopher Bond (R-MO), Tom Coburn (R-OK), Thad Cochran (R-MS), John Cornyn (R-TX), James Inhofe (R-OK), Pat Roberts (R-KS), Jeff Sessions (R-AL), and Ted Stevens (R-AK).
Bush's signing statement read:
"The executive branch shall construe Title X in Division A of the Act, relating to detainees, in a manner consistent with the constitutional authority of the President to supervise the unitary executive branch and as Commander in Chief and consistent with the constitutional limitations on the judicial power, which will assist in achieving the shared objective of the Congress and the President, evidenced in Title X, of protecting the American people from further terrorist attacks."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCain_Detainee_Amendment
-
@Michael Harold
I agree with you. I was about to type pretty much the same thing you wrote.
I think if the American people actually understood what habeas corpus meant, they never would have let that bill go through. But the American people certainly can't care about something they don't understand. For too many people in this country, the "freedom" that we are fighting for in Iraq, is the freedom to consume at will. The freedom to choose which big-screen tv is going to max-out our credit cards: Zenith, or Samsung?
The Bush initiative to do away with Social Security went nowhere because the American people properly understood what was going on. They effectively stopped what the Bush administration was trying to do. Each person felt like he or she had a personal stake in that issue, which is key. Of course, each person has a personal stake in habeas corpus, too, but not enough people understand that.
I realize I may get slammed for being overly cynical and pessimistic, but I talk to way too many people who rationalize things like shopping at Wal-Mart like this: "Why should everyone else enjoy low prices but me? I'm gonna shop where the prices are lowest, and that place is Wal-Mart. Why should I punish myself by boycotting Wal-Mart and let everyone else enjoy those low prices?" THAT is the mentality we are dealing with in this country.
-
Holly M
What we have instead is 2 failing occupations that bleed strength and stature out of us with every passing day it.
-- Holly McLachlan
Additionally, the distraction of an irrational vendetta against Iraq has served as a rallying point for all the anti-American sentiment that the world can muster. The fact that we lost track of bin Laden in the course of perpretatrating this farce only adds to an international opinion that the Americans are unable to focus on the real target. Always chasing phantoms. Naive, self-righteous bullies.
The neo-cons embody the stereotype 'ugly American'