FROM PHOENIX, ARIZONANORTH AMERICAN AFFAIRS
SPECIAL NOTICE - for TiM readers who understand Serbian: We’ve posted at our Web site an interview with the TiM editor that was published today in Belgrade by the Nedeljni Telegraf. If interested, just click on - http://www.truthinmedia.org/Columns/telegraf7-26-2k.html.
1. Weep Mankind: “Dubya”
“Death Merchant” for Veep (by Justin Raimondo)
2. Albright’s State - Soros’ Estate, Act II: Now Soros Get
His Paws on $100 Million of Public Funds
3. New Internet e-Mail Tax Proposed? Not!
Beware of False Rumors
Chooses Warmonger/”Death Merchant” for Veep (by Justin Raimondo)
PHOENIX, July 26 - Shortly after Bill Clinton had defeated George Bush Sr. in the 1992 presidential elections, the TiM editor had to travel to Europe on business. Wherever he went, and especially in the former Yugoslavia, people wanted to know what sort of a change in foreign policy they could expect?
“None whatsoever,” the TiM editor would reply. “Both Clinton and Bush are in the race for the same stable owners. Things may only change for the worse.” (since many recent wars had been either started or escalated when a Democrat sat in the White House).
Nearly eight years later, people are asking the same question. Only in reverse. What sort of a change can they expect if George W. Bush Jr., “Dubya,” wins the presidency next November.
And our answer is the same as in 1992. “None whatsoever. Both Gore and ‘Dubya’ are in the race for the same stable owners.”
After yesterday’s official selection of Dick Cheney as the Veep by “Dubya,” we can again add to it that, “things may only change for the worse.” As we did in 1992. (As if things can get any worse, especially in the Balkans, right?).
This time, however, you don’t have to take just our word for it. Justin Raimondo, the editorial director of www.Antiwar.com, has just about said the same thing in his article “Dick Cheney and Bush's Other Warmongers,” which we bring you below with the Antiwar.com permission.
For those of the TiM readers who may not be familiar with
Raimondo, he is also the author of Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost
Legacy of the Conservative Movement (with an Introduction by Patrick J.
Buchanan), (1993), and Into the Bosnian Quagmire: The Case Against U.S.
Intervention in the Balkans (1996). He is an Adjunct Scholar with the
Ludwig von Mises Institute, in Auburn, Alabama, a Senior Fellow at the
Center for Libertarian Studies, and writes frequently for Chronicles: A
Magazine of American Culture. He is also the author of An Enemy of the
State: The Life of Murray N. Rothbard.
And now, with that
as the sizzle (intro), here’s Raimondo’s steak (take) on “Cheney et.
Cheney and Bush's Other Warmongers
Cheney's ascension to the number two spot on the Republican ticket tells
us much about the kind of foreign policy we can come to expect if Dubya
makes it to the White House. To begin with, it means that the US will be
in the Balkans forever. As CEO of the Halliburton Company, Cheney was
among the chief profiteers of the Kosovo war: Brown & Root, a Houston
subsidiary of Halliburton, was awarded the engineering contract to house,
feed, and otherwise amuse the US "peacekeepers" plonked down in
the middle of that quagmire.
(TiM Ed.: Indeed, also see, “The Pentagon Was in for Long Haul,” our wartime Bulletin S99-45, Item 3, Day 23, Apr. 15, filed from Belgrade about a $1 billion, 3-5 year services contract the Pentagon had awarded Dick Cheney’s company BEFORE NATO’s bombing - http://www.truthinmedia.org/kosovo/war/day23.HTML )
engineering is just a sideline for Halliburton, which is primarily a
company that provides services and infrastructure for oil extraction
operations. Halliburton's interest in the oil fields of the Caucasus cast
Cheney in the role of a lobbyist, angling for the repeal of legislation
that forbids foreign aid to undemocratic regimes. The government of
Azerbaijan, ruled by an ex-Stalinist despot, has long sought to get on the
foreign aid gravy train, and Cheney has been one of their chief advocates:
with Halliburton's man in the VP's mansion, this will no longer be a
problem – and the door to US intervention in the region will swing wide
open. The Bush Team is sure to go marching through.
Republicans hope that the incoming Bush administration – and that's an
assumption that may be very transitory – will pull troops out of the
Balkans, and start to pull back from our global commitments – which
multiplied beyond all reason during the Clinton interregnum. The elevation
of Cheney should strip loyal GOPers of their illusions.
DUBYA DUBYA DOT WARMONGER DOT COM
the foreign policy positions of George "Dubya" Bush, the
Republican "frontrunner," based on his own statements, is an
impossible task – since those statements are so few and far between
that, taken together, they amount to no more than a few sentences. And
these are not exactly oracular words of wisdom but vague sentiments that
do not easily translate into policy. What does translate into policy,
however, is his choice of foreign policy advisors – and the news is not
three foreign policy mavens always mentioned in news stories about Dubya's
shadow Cabinet are: Condoleeza Rice, Paul Wolfowitz, and Dick Cheney. Ms.
Rice, former Stanford University provost and a low-level advisor to
Dubya's father, is often cited as the chief of this policy group, a future
Secretary of State – but this is the story being told by the Bushies,
and it doesn't quite add up. Like everything else in the Bush campaign,
the foreign policy "team" assembled by the candidate and his
campaign staff has all the earmarks of a classic Potemkin village – a
phony fašade put up to impress those who don't bother looking too
closely. Well, then, let's look a little more closely at the Bushies'
answer to Mad Madeleine.
started out as a music major at Stanford but almost flunked out, whereupon
she switched to Soviet studies. Rice became interested in her specialty of
Soviet studies as a student of Joseph Korbel, the father of Secretary of
State Madeleine Albright. Now there is an interesting coincidence, one
that underscores the inbred nature of the foreign policy-making elite: how
different from Mad Madeleine will Secretary of State Rice turn out to be?
Two years from today will we be calling her Crazy Condoleeza?
OF A MEDIOCRITY
found her niche, Ms. Rice was quickly taken in hand by the Hoover
Institution, a redoubt of the George Shultz/Bechtel wing of the Republican
foreign policy elite, where she rose quickly through the ranks. As the
sole person of color, and a female to boot, in an administration devoted
to "affirmative access" (if not action), her visibility was
high. But there is nothing in Rice's resume to suggest that she is the
heavyweight the Bushies are describing. The apex of her academic career
was reached with the 1984 publication of her magnum opus, The Soviet Union
and the Czechoslovak Army, 1948-1983 : Uncertain Allegiance, a
dissertation no more indicative of her capabilities as a future Secretary
of State than her more recent unimpressive contribution to an anthology on
first Bush administration Ms. Rice was the author of no known policy
initiatives, and in the interim her career as provost at Stanford has not
exactly catapulted her into the international spotlight. So what gives?
How can we explain this strange gap between Rice's real achievements and
the grandiose future planned for her by Bush campaign operatives?
probably unkind, and no doubt a hate crime, to call attention not only to
Ms. Rice's curious lack of qualifications but also to her race – to the
likelihood that she is an affirmative action "front." In the
same way that many companies nowadays get government contracts under
affirmative action rules, with a bunch of white guys getting blacks (or
whomever) to front for them, so it works the same way in politics, where
identity politics and "diversity" are the political coin of the
realm. The disparity between Rice's resume and her projected status in
Dubya's administration is otherwise inexplicable. In an age where
political correctness has even infected the Republican Party, race is
always a key factor, not only in getting Ms. Rice where she is, but where
– perhaps – she is going.
WAR TO MINORITIES
great advantage of having an African American Secretary of State, who
would forevermore be known as the First Black Secretary of State, is that
it will help sell interventionism among American blacks and other
minorities of color. Polls show that blacks are among the most skeptical
when it comes to overseas intervention, generally agreeing with the
proposition that we ought to take care of our problems right here at home.
A black Secretary of State would help an administration hard-pressed to
sell a war for oil in the far-off Transcaucus, or a Vietnam-style
intervention against Colombian "narco-terrorists." Another big
factor is motivating the troops, what with blacks and other minorities now
making up a majority of the military rank-and-file.
Ms. Rice is a front, then who or what is she fronting for? Who or what is
behind the Potemkin village fašade of George Dubya's foreign policy task
force? The other two members of the team, former Secretary of Defense Dick
Cheney and Paul Wolfowitz, make up the two major components of the Bushian
foreign policy coalition: Big Oil and the neo-conservative/Weekly Standard
wing of the GOP. While the goals of the former are relatively coherent,
and well-known – the desire for profits is universal and easily
understood – the obscure ideological motivations of that exotic sect
known as the neocons is not so easily or succinctly explained.
those interested in a detailed explanation, I refer you to my 1993 book,
Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative
Movement, which traces in detail the evolution of this obscure sect from
far Left to the ostensible Right. Suffice to say here that these Cold
Warriors in search of a new enemy, have now fixated on China, and
Wolfowitz, Dean of the Paul Nitze School of Advanced International
Studies, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs
under President Reagan, and undersecretary of Defense in the Bush
administration, is their ideological point man. If there is a war,
anywhere at any time, that Paul Wolfowitz has opposed: if there is a
single concession he ever endorsed, even one instance where he speculated
that any degree of mutual disarmament or easing of tensions ought to take
precedence over military action and preparations for war, then it has gone
unrecorded. His emergence as the policy guru on George Dubya's team
signals the complete takeover of the Bush campaign by the War Party.
specifically, Wolfowitz represents that wing of the War Party that is
focused on the alleged "threat" of China. For Wolfowitz, a
former U.S. ambassador to Indonesia, is convinced that the locus of power
is shifting definitively in the direction of Asia. With the freeing up of
the Chinese economy, and the growth of Asian markets in general, sheer
numbers, he avers, will soon point to the possibility of Asian hegemony in
the world. He compares 21st century China to 19th century Germany, and
speculates that Chinese nationalism spurred on by national resentment over
past wrongs will spur Chinese belligerence. He warns that those who ignore
the Yellow Peril are in danger of making the mistake of Neville
Chamberlain whom "lamented that his countrymen were preparing bomb
shelters because of 'a quarrel among faraway peoples about whom we know
nothing.' Of course, that attitude of Chamberlain's led to a terrible war
that could have been prevented, a war that Winston Churchill called 'The
CONFERENCE OF CONSERVATIVE ANGLOPHILES
these references to Great Britain, and particularly Wolfowitz's World War
II analogy, were meant as crowd-pleasers, for this was said in a speech to
the Atlanticist Initiative, the "conservative" equivalent of the
old "Union Now" movement of Clarence Straits. Just as the Union
Now organization used to push for a formal merger of the US and Great
Britain, so the new "Atlanticists" are the chief spokesmen for
the cohesion of American and British foreign policy – with the latter
invariably taking the lead and stiffening the spine of the often reluctant
Uncle Sam. The spirit of this conference of prominent American
conservatives, and their special relationship to the Mother Country, was
symbolized by the featured speaker, Lady Thatcher, that icon of right-wing
Anglophilia. It was, in short, a meeting of the Anglophile Caucus of the
War Party, convened to discuss their relevance in the post-Cold War world.
Wolfowitz's message to them was simple and direct: the end of the Cold War
does not and cannot mean peace. War, war, and more war – that is the
inevitable albeit tragic fate of the human race, and we had better prepare
THIRD WORLD WAR
extraordinarily revealing attack on Francis Fukuyama, Wolfowitz attacked
the idea that we are in an era of peace, openly ridiculing the thesis that
we are at "the end of history," and comparing the present era to
the prewar years of 1917 and the 1930s. War is not only probable, but also
imminent, and we must prepare. The role of the NATO alliance is key: to
make sure that Russia stays out of Central Asia. To underscore the
seriousness of the alleged threat from China, he even raises the
possibility of a Russo-American alliance against Beijing. Of course, this
is all discussed in the manner of the value-free "scientist"
examining the unfolding of historical trends, but the policy implications
are clear and ominous enough.
staunch member in good standing of the neocon foreign policy brain trust,
Wolfowitz was naturally a cheerleader in Clinton's war against the Serbian
people. He was early on associated with the Balkan war lobby, notably the
Balkan Institute and the Balkan Action Council, both funded in large part
by George Soros. He signed two newspaper ads run by the neocons in the New
York Times: one full-pager calling for extended and massive intervention
early on [September 20, 1998], and another criticizing the Clintonians for
not doing enough to "win" in Kosovo once they were involved.
Among his co-signers were the usual suspects, a motley collection of
Right-wing Social Democrats from the Lane Kirkland wing of the War Party,
to neoconservative Republicans such as William Kristol and Jeanne
Kirkpatrick. The ascension of Wolfowitz to the top policy spot means that
a policy vigorously opposed by the majority of congressional Republicans
– and primary voters – is going to be embraced by the party's likely
nominee. This is how our nation's "bipartisan" foreign policy of
global interventionism has managed to stay in place for half a century,
without any significant challenge – the people never get to vote on it.
CHENEY AND THE SPIRIT OF MERCANTILISM
other member of the Bushian foreign policy triumvirate, Dick Cheney, plays
a different if by no means subordinate role. As a former Secretary of
Defense, now the president of the Halliburton Company, the biggest
provider of products and services to the petroleum industry, Cheney
represents the alliance of Big Oil money and the military-industrial
complex. After presiding over the Defense Department, Cheney graduated to
the world of big business, where he became President of Halliburton. Under
Cheney's leadership, Halliburton has expanded the range of services it
offers and has spent about $1 billion acquiring companies with different
niche specialties. The company bought Landmark Graphics Corp., in 1996, a
company that makes software for seismic evaluations of petroleum
reservoirs. Last year, it gobbled up Numar Corp.: their software enables
drillers to analyze subsurface rock formations in newly drilled wells
using magnetic resonance imaging. The recent acquisition of the Dresser
Company means that Halliburton has acquired strong engineering
capabilities and drilling systems to complement its strength in energy
sector construction and maintenance. Reemerging onto the political stage,
Cheney is playing a major role in what may become the biggest and most
profitable deal of his private sector career – the coming war for oil in
the troubled Transcaucasus.
links to Texas oil barons, and his political connections, Cheney is
gearing up with the rest of the oil industry to cash in on the Great
Caspian Oil Bonanza. Cheney has been in the forefront of the effort to
repeal US legislation that forbids foreign aid to undemocratic regimes
such as the government of Azerbaijan. That central Asian nation, ruled by
a neo-Stalinist dictator, is where a good deal of the oil is located; it
is also a key link in the oil companies' scheme to build a trans-Balkan/Transcaucasian
oil pipeline to bring its product to market in Western Europe. Can anyone
doubt that "a quarrel among faraway peoples about whom we know
nothing" in that tumultuous region will suddenly involve
"vital" US "national interests"? As Russian troops
fight Islamic rebels in Dagestan, and the Armenians and Azeris call for
the US and/or NATO to intervene, the prospect of George Dubya in the White
House begins to take on a distinctly ominous aspect.
to be, not so long ago, that the interface of corporate interests and US
foreign policy was far subtler. In these decadents days of imperial
excess, however, there is a pagan shamelessness in the unseemly spectacle
of revolving doors between corporate and government institutions. A man
like Cheney, who segues so rapidly and easily from chief warmaker to chief
executive officer of a major international corporation, is the perfect
symbol of the Republican foreign policy establishment in the age of George
Dubya. If Wolfowitz is the chief theoretician of this mercantilist dogma
that equates untapped oil fields with "the national interest,"
then Cheney is its chief practitioner – and among the most successful.
TO THE ROOT OF THE MATTER
companies envision a pipeline that will carry their product across Eastern
Europe to customers in the West – and the Albanian end of that
trans-Balkan route is already being taken care of. It was the Houston
engineering firm of Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, that
won the contract to build barracks not only in Bosnia, but also in Kosovo
and Albania; they were one of the biggest direct beneficiaries of the war.
As Wolfowitz was signing newspaper ads demanding the introduction of US
ground troops into Kosovo, Halliburton was busy building and outfitting
the Albanian staging areas.
neo-conservative intellectuals, like Wolfowitz, expend millions of words
to prove and reprove the necessity of their policies, of the inevitability
of perpetual war for perpetual peace, while second-and-third tier
activists like William Kristol proclaim the virtues of a "benevolent
world hegemony." But in the end it boils down to such vulgar matters
as Halliburton's profit margins and the price of oil. In an era in which
wars are fought in the name of vague and improbable ideals, such as
"human rights" and "multiculturalism," it is a safe
bet to follow the money. It works almost every time.”
TiM Ed.: You can check out this
an other Raimondo columns at - http://www.antiwar.com/justin/justincol.html
Albright State - Soros’ Estate, Act II
Get His Paws on $100 Million of Public Funds; Montenegro - Now a
WASHINGTON, July 26
- Regular TiM readers may recall our comment, “Albright’s
State - Soros’ Estate,” published last December, about the
Secretary of State invoking U.S. national interests to block a $500
million loan by the U.S. Export-Import Bank to a Russian oil company, with
which financier George Soros had been in a commercial dispute.
Well, “Albright’s State -
Soros’ Estate, Act II” has just unfolded.
The Clinton administration has selected George Soros to manage a
$150 million investment fund for the Balkans, according to today’s (July
26) Wall Street Journal story, “U.S. Chooses Soros to Run Balkans
Fund.” Soros will invest
$50 million himself, while the Overseas Private Investment Corp. (OPIC), a
federal government agency, will contribute $100 million.
But OPIC (read the U.S.
taxpayers) will serve only as a lender, not an investor.
All investment decisions will be made by Soros Private Fund
How’s that for a sweet deal?
The Clinton administration has basically outsourced its Balkans
economic policy to Soros. Judging by early indications, however, Washington’s
anti-Serbian stance will be continued, if not strengthened, under the
Soros management. Not only is
Serbia excluded from the Balkans countries eligible to receive proceeds
from the new fund, but a state that doesn’t exist has been included.
Montenegro, Yugoslavia’s southern province whose leader is a
Washington stooge, was listed as an eligible “country.”
Other countries that can qualify
for investments under this Soros-OPIC project are Albania, Bosnia,
Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, Romania, Slovenia and Turkey.
Greece’s absence from the list
of eligible Balkans countries is also curious, especially considering the
inclusion of ALL of its neighbors, including Turkey.
Now, you don’t suppose that might have something to do with the
anti-Orthodox Christian stance of the Washington-led New World Order, do
you? (see “Anti-Christian
Crusades of the 20th Century”).
New Internet e-Mail Tax Proposed? Not!
of False Rumors
WASHINGTON, July 18 - A TiM web site visitor sent us the following information last week about a supposedly new proposed tax on Internet e-mail. Here’s an excerpt:
"NO" to Bill 602P
last few months have revealed an alarming trend in the Government of the
United States attempting to quietly push through legislation that will
affect our use of the Internet.
proposed legislation, the US Postal Service will be attempting to bill
E-mail users out of "alternative postage fees". Bill 602P will
permit the Federal Government to charge a 5 cent surcharge on every E-Mail
delivered, by billing Internet Service Providers at source.
consumer would then be billed in turn by the ISP. Washington DC lawyer
Richard Stepp is working without pay to prevent this legislation from
becoming law. The US Postal Service is claiming lost revenue, due to the
proliferation of E-mail, is costing nearly $230,000,000 in revenue per
the US Postal Service is allowed to tinker with E-mail, it will mark the
end of the "free" Internet in the United States. Our congressional representative, Tony Schnell (R) has even
suggested a "$20-$40 per month surcharge on all Internet
service" above and beyond the governments proposed E-mail
But when we went to the House of
Representatives Web site to verify this information, and find out the
status of the bill, we discovered that the “news” about this bill was
a hoax. Here’s for example,
what an Ohio
Representative, Michael Oxley, had to say about this “bill,” among
many other denials like it:
Michael G. Oxley, Fourth Ohio District
on "Bill 602P" and E-Mail Surcharges
may know, it was reported that a "Congressman Tony Schnell"
recently introduced "Bill 602P," which would allow the federal
government to impose a five-cent surcharge on every e-mail sent.
The money collected would be given to the United States Postal
Service. This rumor has been
widely spread via e-mail throughout the country.
rumor is absolutely false. No
such legislation exists. In
fact, no "Congressman Tony Schnell" exists.
The Postal Service has no authority to collect fees for e-mail, and
has indicated that it would not support legislation to allow such fees to
be imposed. You can find more
information about this rumor at the Postal Service's website.
Chairman of the Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Telecommunications,
Trade, and Consumer Protection, know that I will work hard to ensure that
no such Internet fees are imposed.”
TiM Ed.: We do not know who and why is spreading such false rumors, but we thought it was important to warn the TiM readers about this one. There are certainly enough real government efforts that may endanger our liberties and wallets (such as Echelon, Carnivore, for example) that we should not allow ourselves to fall for such cheap tricks as the above “bill,” and waste our energies swinging at the windmills, like Don Quixote.
Also, check out... Djurdjevic's WASHINGTON TIMES columns: "Christianity Under Siege," "Silence Over Persecuted Christians", "Chinese Dragon Wagging Macedonian Tail," "An Ugly Double Standard in Kosovo Conflict?", "NATO's Bullyboys", "Kosovo: Why Are We Involved?", and "Ginning Up Another Crisis"