Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Wow, I daresay that most corporations like their spokemsmen to be low key and under the radar, not lightning rods.
When (and if) this story starts getting some play, even if it doesn't get huge play, Di Rita appearing in congressional hearings would less than please me if I had any anything at stake at beleaguered BOA.
CQ, June 1, 2007:
http://public.cq.com/docs/hs/hsnews110-000002523531.html
Defense Officials Tried to Reverse China Policy, Says Powell Aide
By Jeff Stein, CQ National Security Editor[...] Another key character in the minidrama was Therese Shaheen, the outspoken chief of the U.S. office of the American Institute in Taiwan, which took on the functions of the American embassy after the formal 1979 diplomatic switch.
Shaheen, who happens to be DiRita’s wife, openly championed Chen and the independence movement, at one point even publicly reinterpreting Bush’s reiteration of the “one China” policy, saying that the administration “had never said it ‘opposed’ Taiwan independence,” according to a 2004 account in the authoritative Far Eastern Economic Review.
“Therese Shaheen . . . said don’t sweat it, the president didn’t really mean what he said,” Wilkerson said.
Coming from the wife of Rumsfeld’s spokesman, Shaheen’s remarks sent off angry alarms in Beijing.
Powell asked for her resignation.
Douglas Paal was then head of the American Institute in Taiwan, effectively making him the U.S. ambassador there. He backed up Wilkerson’s account.
“In the early years of the Bush administration,” Paal said by e-mail last week, “there was a problem with mixed signals to Taiwan from Washington. This was most notably captured in the statements and actions of Ms. Therese Shaheen, the former AIT chair, which ultimately led to her departure.”
Now retired, Paal said he, too, “received many first- and second-hand reports of messages conveyed to Taiwan by DoD civilians and perhaps a uniformed officer or two during that time that were out of sync with President Bush’s position.”
DiRita defended his wife, saying
“she understood U.S. policy and executed it to the very best of her abilities and wasn’t trying to play games with” Taiwanese independence forces.
“That was always kind of a mythology of what happened over there,” he said.
“They are dangerous men who will lie about almost anyone or anything,” Wilkerson angrily responded by e-mail, singling out Feith, DiRita, Cheney and Rumsfeld for scorn.
He called back-stage encouragement of the Taiwanese “even more serious” than the alleged manipulation of Iraq intelligence, because it could provoke China to attack the island, triggering a U.S. response and the world’s first nuclear shooting war. [...]
- - CQ, June 1, 2007
China Post, March 22, 2008:
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/national/presidential%20election/2008/03/22/148277/Former-AIT.htm
Former AIT head Shaheen warned against involvement in 'green card' issue
The China Post news staff
TAIPEI, Taiwan -- Theresa Shaheen, former chairwoman of the American Institute in Taiwan, is being given a timely warning against getting involved in the "green card" issue over Kuomintang presidential hopeful Ma Ying-jeou.
"We wish Ms. Shaheen to know that it's unlawful for an foreign national to get involved in an election in Taiwan," a top aide to Ma said yesterday. According to the Election Law, no foreign nationals may electioneer for a candidate in Taiwan. [...]
- - China Post, March 22, 2008
Here's her (and her husband's) current political donation activity:
http://fundrace.huffingtonpost.com/neighbors.php?type=loc&addr=9509+PURCELL+DRIVE&zip=20854
That's a good description of John Stauber in the PBS piece. I'm confident he'll never be asked to comment there again.
JUDY WOODRUFF: John Stauber, just to understand, are you saying that if what these analysts were doing at the Pentagon had been fully disclosed, if their business connections with the defense contractors had been fully disclosed, would that have made what they did acceptable, in that the audience watching these interviews would have been aware?JOHN STAUBER: No, not at all. The full disclosure actually came about this Sunday, and actually it's only partial disclosure. And that disclosure is that -- and the New York Times is the only news organization in full possession of these documents -- the Pentagon military analyst program began with Donald Rumsfeld and Torie Clark.
Seventy-five-plus former military officers were recruited. And they delivered the talking points of the Bush administration to manage the news media coverage and public opinion of the war.
The flow wasn't from journalists knocking on the door of the Pentagon and saying, "Excuse me, Admiral, I'd like to ask a question. First question: Are you retired and do you work for military contractors?" That would be -- that's totally fine.
The flow was illegal government propaganda, recruiting these people, and inserting them into the news, and then hiring a company to measure and quantify how good a job they did of selling the war and managing press and public opinion. This is Goebbels-like. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media/jan-june08/tvgenerals_04-24.html
Complete with a Nazi reference and self contradiction. What a hoot. Please, I invite all to read this. I wish it were available on video.
Who are the salonistas rooting for in Lebanon? Hezbollah?
"Who are the salonistas rooting for in Lebanon? Hezbollah?"
Is there some reason you wish to change the subject, Shooter?
After Barstow's story broke, Di Rita had this piece at NRO praising Feith's book, War and Decision.
April 24, 2008, 4:00 a.m.The Second Draft of History
Inside war planning.
By Larry Di Rita
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZTNhY2NmN2ZjY2UwMzBmZTY2MjY0MzE0NmRiNDY1OWM=
Bucky,
I'm glad to hear you have discovered Nozick. In Anarchy, The State and Utopia, he attacks anarchists like Rothbard, argues that a minimal state is legitimate and argues that no single utopia is sufficient. Welcome to the cabal of evil statist lackeys.
You are an expert on Islamofascists.
Is Di Rita married to an Islamofascist? Shaheen?
Or is that a member of the IRA?
Is there some reason you wish to change the subject, Shooter?
-- Jebbie
Sure, I'd say the Generals being Generals issue is pretty much dead, and discussing libertarianism is akin to arguing how many angels dance on the head of a pin. On the other hand the Lebanon situation is a good excercise of what can happen when we don't interfere in national politics. I'd say that's relevant to global politics, certainly more so than anything else going on here.
On the other hand, salonistas love to discuss irrelevancies to death. I can only presume it's a coping mechanism to avoid reality.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
