-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-

9/11 Commission Report Takes on Patriot Act,
Government Secrecy; ACLU Outlines Civil
Liberties Problems With Cabinet-Level Spymaster
===============================================

ACLU | Press Release

Thursday 22 July 2004

Washington - The official 9/11 Commission report,
released today, takes aim at the USA Patriot Act and
the excessive amount of official secrecy in the Bush
administration.

"Regarding civil liberties, the 9/11 Commission report
essentially says that the Justice Department and White
House have not made a compelling case for either the
administration�s obsession with secrecy or its Patriot
Act," said Anthony D. Romero, ACLU Executive Director.
"This bipartisan report should serve as a wake-up call
for Congress that it must maintain the sunsets in the
Patriot Act."

As the report states on page 394, "The burden of proof
for retaining a particular governmental power should be
on the executive, to explain (a) that the power
actually materially enhances security and (b) that
there is adequate supervision of the executive�s use of
the powers to ensure protection of civil liberties. If
the power is granted, there must be adequate guidelines
and oversight to properly confine its use."

The long-awaited report, which contains the official
findings of the independent commission investigating
the 9/11 terrorism attacks, contains significant
recommendations germane to the debate over civil
liberties that has raged for more than two-and-a-half
years now.

The report echoes criticisms by the ACLU and others
that the Justice Department has so far failed to
demonstrate why the expanded surveillance and
investigative powers in the Patriot Act are needed to
fight terrorism. The commission�s findings, the ACLU
said, strongly confirm the need to maintain the Patriot
Act sunsets.

The sunset provisions - which apply to some of the
Patriot Act�s most controversial provisions - would
require Congress to reconsider about a tenth of the law
in December 2005. Provisions that sunset include the
infamous "library records" provision, which reduces
judicial review when counter-intelligence agents seek
secret court orders for the production of a wide array
of personal information, including library, business,
genetic, medical and even gun purchase records.

Notably, the commission does not recommend that any
sunseted provisions should be made permanent.

In addition, the commission�s report contains a list of
10 separate missed "operational" opportunities to foil
the attacks. While the report stops short of calling
the attacks preventable, it clearly shows that the
intelligence and law enforcement communities were not
using their existing counter-terrorism powers to their
fullest potential.

"The administration has yet to explain why it didn�t
use its already expansive power to the fullest before
9/11," said Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU
Washington Legislative Office. "The commission�s report
suggests that the White House claim that the worst
parts of the Patriot Act are needed to stop terrorism
is dubious, to say the least."

The report also cites both excessive government secrecy
and overclassification as threats to open government
and, more notably, as threats to national security. The
ACLU pointed to the finding as evidence that the
government should stop stonewalling the series of
Freedom of Information Act requests submitted by the
ACLU and other civil liberties groups on the Patriot
Act, the Abu Ghraib scandal and other matters of public
interest.

Characterizing the current Congressional intelligence
watchdog system as "dysfunctional," the commission�s
strongest recommendation is the need for more
aggressive Congressional oversight of the intelligence
community, including making the intelligence budget
public. The ACLU applauded the move but emphasized that
the structure of the committee would be less important
than whether its operation was in turn open to public
scrutiny.

As the report stated: "Secrecy stifles oversight,
accountability and information sharing. Unfortunately,
all the current organizational incentives encourage
over-classification. This balance should change; and as
a start, open information should be provided about the
overall size of agency intelligence budgets."

Contrary to earlier reports, the commission explicitly
rejects - in part, for civil liberties reasons - the
creation of a domestic intelligence agency modeled
after Britain�s MI-5. The ACLU, a critic of any
domestic intelligence activity that is not linked to
law enforcement, applauded the move.

Unfortunately, there are some recommendations that
raise civil liberties concerns; two of the most salient
are calls for the backdoor creation of national ID
cards in the form of a standardized drivers licenses
and a cabinet-level intelligence czar.

"A Senate-confirmed intelligence director sitting in
the White House would be in the hip pocket of the
president," Romero added.

The ACLU questioned whether pitting the FBI�s culture
of case-oriented law enforcement against the CIA�s
culture of covert, subversive operations, under one
chief, would result in a further weakening of civil
liberties protections in the FBI�s intelligence work.
Similarly, if the new director were to have operational
control over both domestic and foreign intelligence
work - that is, real authority over both the FBI and
the CIA - he or she could blur the lines between the
agencies� two very different missions.

Finally, the ACLU expressed concern that if the
director of national intelligence ends up controlling
the purse strings of the entire intelligence community,
there are very few contingencies that could keep the
director from exercising specific, operational control
over both domestic and foreign intelligence.


The 9/11 Commission's report can be found at:
http://www.9-11commission.gov.
For more information, see:
http://www.aclu.org/safeandfree.


222222222222222222222222222222222222222222
****************************************
=================================
The Profits of war
================

Halliburton has become a byword for the cosy links
between the White House and Texan big business. But how
did the company run in the 90s by Dick Cheney secure a
deal that guaranteed it millions in profit every time
the US military saw action? In this exclusive extract
from his new book, Dan Briody reveals how the firm made
a killing on the battleground

Thursday July 22, 2004
The Guardian (UK)

On January 12 1991, Congress authorised President
George HW Bush to engage Iraq in war. Just five days
later, Operation Desert Storm commenced in Kuwait. As
with the more recent war in the Gulf, it did not take
long for the US to claim victory - it was all over by
the end of February - but the clean-up would last
longer, and was far more expensive than the military
action itself. In a senseless act of desperation and
defeat, Iraqi troops set fire to more than 700 Kuwaiti
oil wells, resulting in a constant fog of thick, black
smoke that turned day into night.
It was thought the mess would take no less than five
years to clean up, as lakes of oil surrounding each
well blazed out of control, making it nearly impossible
to approach the burning wells, let alone extinguish
them. But with the fighting over, Halliburton angled
its way into the clean-up and rebuilding effort that
was expected to cost around $200bn (�163bn) over the
next 10 years.

The company sent 60 men to help with the firefighting
effort. Meanwhile, its engineering and construction
subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) won an additional
$3m contract to assess the damage that the invasion had
done to Kuwait's infrastructure - a contract whose
value had multiplied seven times by the end of KBR's
involvement. More significantly still, KBR won a
contract to extract troops from Saudi Arabia after
their services were no longer needed in the Gulf.
Halliburton was back in the army logistics business in
earnest for the first time since Vietnam. The end of
the Gulf war saw nothing less than the rebirth of the
military outsourcing business.

Military outsourcing was not new. Private firms had
been aiding in war efforts since long before KBR won
its first naval shipbuilding contract. But the nature
of military outsourcing has changed dramatically in the
last decade. The trend towards a "downsized" military
began because of the "peace dividend" at the end of the
cold war, and continued throughout the 1990s. This
combination of a reduced military but continued
conflict gave rise to an unprecedented new industry of
private military firms. These firms would assist the
military in everything from weapons procurement and
maintenance to training of troops and logistics.

In the decade after the first Gulf war, the number of
private contractors used in and around the battlefield
increased tenfold. It has been estimated that there is
now one private contractor for every 10 soldiers in
Iraq. Companies such as Halliburton, which became the
fifth largest defence contractor in the nation during
the 1990s, have played a critical role in this trend.

The story behind America's "super contract" begins in
1992, when the department of defence, then headed by
Dick Cheney, was impressed with the work Halliburton
did during its time in Kuwait. Sensing the need to
bolster its forces in the event of further conflicts of
a similar nature, the Pentagon asked private
contractors to bid on a $3.9m contract to write a
report on how a private firm could provide logistical
support to the army in the case of further military
action.

The report was to examine 13 different "hot spots"
around the world, and detail how services as varied as
building bases to feeding the troops could be
accomplished. The contractor that would potentially
provide the services detailed in the report would be
required to support the deployment of 20,000 troops
over 180 days. It was a massive contingency plan, the
first of its kind for the American military.

Thirty-seven companies tendered for the contract; KBR
won it. The company was paid another $5m later that
year to extend the plan to other locations and add
detail.

The KBR report, which remains classified to this day,
convinced Cheney that it was indeed possible to create
one umbrella contract and award it to a single firm.
The contract became known as the Logistics Civil
Augmentation Programme (Logcap) and has been called
"the mother of all service contracts". It has been used
in every American deployment since its award in 1992 -
at a cost of several billion dollars (and counting).
The lucky recipient of the first, five-year Logcap
contract was the very same company hired to draw up the
plan in the first place: KBR.

The Logcap contract pulled KBR out of its late 1980s
doldrums and boosted the bottom line of Halliburton
throughout the 1990s. It is, effectively, a blank
cheque from the government. The contractor makes its
money from a built-in profit percentage, anywhere from
1% to 9%, depending on various incentive clauses. When
your profit is a percentage of the cost, the more you
spend, the more you make.

Before the ink was dry on the first Logcap contract,
the US army was deployed to Somalia in December 1992 as
part of Operation Restore Hope. KBR employees were
there before the army even arrived, and they were the
last to leave. The firm made $109.7m in Somalia. In
August 1994, they earned $6.3m from Operation Support
Hope in Rwanda. In September of that same year,
Operation Uphold Democracy in Haiti netted the company
$150m. And in October 1994, Operation Vigilant Warrior
made them another $5m.

In the spirit of "refuse no job", the company was
building the base camps, supplying the troops with food
and water, fuel and munitions, cleaning latrines, even
washing their clothes. They attended the staff meetings
and were kept up to speed on all the activities related
to a given mission. They were becoming another unit in
the US army.

The army's growing dependency on the company hit home
when, in 1997, KBR lost the Logcap contract in a
competitive rebid to rival Dyncorp. The army found it
impossible to remove Brown & Root from their work in
the Balkans - by far the most lucrative part of the
contract - and so carved out the work in that theatre
to keep it with KBR. In 2001, the company won the
Logcap contract again, this time for twice the normal
term length: 10 years.

To the uninitiated, the appointment of Cheney to the
chairman, president, and chief executive officer
positions at Halliburton in August 1995, made little
sense. Cheney had almost no business experience, having
been a career politician and bureaucrat. Financial
analysts downgraded the stock and the business press
openly questioned the decision.

Cheney has been described by those who know him as
everything from low-key to downright bland, but the
confidence he inspired and the loyalty he professed
made him an indispensable part of Donald Rumsfeld's
rise to power. In the 1970s, Rumsfeld became Gerald
Ford's White House chief of staff, with Cheney as his
deputy. In those days, Cheney was assigned a codename
by the secret service that perfectly summed up his
disposition: "Backseat".

But Halliburton understood Cheney's value. With him as
CEO, the company gained considerable leverage in
Washington. Until Cheney's appointment in the autumn of
1995, Halliburton's business results had been decent.
After a loss of $91m in 1993, the company had returned
to profitability in 1994 with an operating profit of
$236m. With the new revenue coming in from Logcap,
Halliburton and its prize subsidiary, KBR, were back on
track. Though Logcap was producing only modest
revenues, it was successful in reintegrating KBR into
the military machine.

The big opportunity came in December 1995, just two
months after Cheney assumed the post of CEO, when the
US sent thousands of troops to the Balkans as a peace-
keeping force. As part of Operation Joint Endeavour,
KBR was dispatched to Bosnia and Kosovo to support the
army in its operations in the region. The task was
massive in scope and size.

One example of the work KBR did in the Balkans was Camp
Bondsteel. The camp was so large that the US general
accounting office (GAO) likened it to "a small town".
The company built roads, power generation, water and
sewage systems, housing, a helicopter airfield, a
perimeter fence, guard towers, and a detention centre.
Bondsteel is the largest and most expensive army base
since Vietnam. It also happens to be built in the path
of the Albanian-Macedonian-Bulgarian Oil (Ambo) Trans-
Balkan pipeline, the pipeline connecting the oil-rich
Caspian Sea region to the rest of the world. The
initial feasibility project for Ambo was done by KBR.

KBR's cash flow from Logcap ballooned under Cheney's
tenure, jumping from $144m in 1994 to more than $423m
in 1996, and the Balkans was the driving force. By
1999, the army was spending just under $1bn a year on
KBR's work in the Balkans. The GAO issued a report in
September 2000 charging serious cost-control problems
in Bosnia, but KBR retains the contract to this day.

Meanwhile, Cheney was busy developing Halliburton's
business in other parts of the world. "It is a false
dichotomy that we have to choose between our commercial
and other interests," he told the [public policy
research foundation] Cato Institute in 1998, speaking
out against economic sanctions levied by the Clinton
administration against countries suspected of terrorist
activity. "Our government has become sanctions-happy,"
he continued.

In particular, Cheney objected to sanctions against
Libya and Iran, two countries with which Halliburton
was already doing business regardless. Even more
disconcerting, though, was the work the company did in
Iraq. Between his stints as secretary of defence and
vice-president, Cheney was in charge of Halliburton
when it was circumventing strict UN sanctions, helping
to rebuild Iraq and enriching Saddam Hussein.

In September 1998, Halliburton closed a $7.7bn stock
merger with Dresser Industries (the company that gave
George HW Bush his first job). The merger made
Halliburton the largest oilfield services firm in the
world. It also brought with it two foreign subsidiaries
that were doing business with Iraq via the
controversial Oil for Food programme. The two
subsidiaries, Dresser Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump
Co, signed $73m-worth of contracts for oil production
equipment.

Cheney told the press during his 2000 run for vice-
president that he had a "firm policy" against doing
business with Iraq. He admitted to doing business with
Iran and Libya, but "Iraq's different," he said. Cheney
told ABC TV: "We've not done any business in Iraq since
UN sanctions were imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a
standing policy that I wouldn't do that."

Three weeks later, Cheney was forced to admit the
business ties, but claimed ignorance. He told reporters
that he was not aware of Dresser's business in Iraq,
and that besides, Halliburton had divested itself of
both companies by 2000. In the meantime, the companies
had done another $30m-worth of business in Iraq before
being sold off.

The Dresser merger was, it appeared, the crowning
achievement of the Cheney years at Halliburton. But
Cheney left Halliburton several other legacies. David
Gribbin, Cheney's former chief of staff, became
Halliburton's chief lobbyist in Washington. Admiral Joe
Lopez, a former commander of the sixth fleet, was hired
to be KBR's governmental operations expert. Together,
Cheney's team made Halliburton one of the top
government contractors in the country. KBR had nearly
doubled its government contracts, from $1.2bn in the
five years prior to his arrival, to $2.3bn during his
five years as CEO. Halliburton soared from 73rd to 18th
on the Pentagon's list of top contractors.

After 9/11, KBR went to work on the war on terrorism,
building the 1,000 detention cells at Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, for terrorist suspects, at a cost of $52m. The
work had to feel familiar to KBR: it had done the exact
same job 35 years earlier in Vietnam. When troops were
deployed to Afghanistan, so was KBR. It built US bases
in Bagram and Kandahar for $157m. As it had done in the
past, KBR had men on the ground before the first troops
even arrived in most locations. They readied the camps,
fed the troops, and hauled away the waste. And they did
it like the military would have done it: fast,
efficient, and effective. It was good work, solid
revenues, but nothing like the windfall the company had
experienced in the Balkans.

In addition, Halliburton won the contract for restoring
the Iraqi oil infrastructure - a contract that was not
competitively bid. It was given to Halliburton out of
convenience, because it had developed the plan for
fighting oil fires (all, by this time, extinguished).
Despite the new business, the fortunes of Halliburton
and its subsidiary have not prospered. The stock that
Cheney cashed in near its peak, when he renewed his
political career in 2000, has since plummeted. The main
culprit was the 1998 merger with Dresser, which saddled
the company with asbestos liabilities that ultimately
led to two Halliburton subsidiaries - one of them KBR -
having to file for bankruptcy.

When Cheney left to become Bush's running mate, he took
a golden parachute package - in addition to the stock
options he was obliged to sell for $30m. In September
2003, Cheney insisted: "Since I've left Halliburton to
become George Bush's vice-president, I've severed all
my ties with the company, gotten rid of all my
financial interests. I have no financial interest in
Halliburton of any kind and haven't now for over three
years."

The Congressional Research Service (CRS), a non-
partisan agency that investigates political issues at
the request of elected officials, says otherwise.
Cheney has been receiving a deferred salary from
Halliburton in the years since he left the company. In
2001, he received $205,298. In 2002, he drew $162,392.
He is scheduled to receive similar payments through
2005, and has an insurance policy in place to protect
the payments in the event that Halliburton should fold.
In addition, Cheney still holds 433,333 unexercised
stock options in Halliburton. He has agreed to donate
any profits to charity.

� The Halliburton Agenda by Dan Briody is published by
John Wiley and Sons Ltd at �16.99. To order a copy for
�14.99 plus p&p, call Guardian Book Service on 0870 836
0875.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1266328,00.html
_______________________________________________________

portside (the left side in nautical parlance) is a news,
discussion and debate service of the Committees of
Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism. It aims to
provide varied material of interest to people on the
left.

For answers to frequently asked questions:
<http://www.portside.org/faq>

To subscribe, unsubscribe or change settings:
<http://lists.portside.org/mailman/listinfo/portside>

To submit material, paste into an email and send to:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (postings are moderated)

For assistance with your account:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To search the portside archive:
<http://people-link5.inch.com/pipermail/portside/>

www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to