| |
"The Secrets of September 11"
http://www.msnbc.com/m/pt/printthis_main.asp?storyID=907379
Even as White House political aides plot a 2004 campaign plan designed to
capitalize on the emotions and issues raised by the September 11 terror
attacks, administration officials are waging a behind-the-scenes battle to
restrict public disclosure of key events relating to the attacks.
AT THE CENTER of the dispute is a more-than-800-page secret report prepared
by a joint congressional inquiry detailing the intelligence and
law-enforcement failures that preceded the attacks--including provocative,
if unheeded warnings, given President Bush and his top advisers during the
summer of 2001.
The report was completed last December; only a bare-bones list of "findings"
with virtually no details was made public. But nearly six months later, a
"working group" of Bush administration intelligence officials assigned to
review the document has taken a hard line against further public disclosure.
By refusing to declassify many of its most significant conclusions, the
administration has essentially thwarted congressional plans to release the
report by the end of this month, congressional and administration sources
tell NEWSWEEK. In some cases, these sources say, the administration has even
sought to "reclassify" some material that was already discussed in public
testimony--a move one Senate staffer described as "ludicrous." The
administration's stand has infuriated the two members of Congress who
oversaw the report--Democratic Sen. Bob Graham and Republican Rep. Porter
Goss. The two are now preparing a letter of complaint to Vice President Dick
Cheney.
Graham is "increasingly frustrated" by the administration's "unwillingness
to release what he regards as important information the public should have
about 9-11," a spokesman said. In Graham's view, the Bush administration
isn't protecting legitimate issues of national security but information that
could be a political "embarrassment," the aide said. Graham, who last year
served as Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, recently told NEWSWEEK:
"There has been a cover-up of this."
----------------------------
"Defense CEOs are big winners of Iraq war"
http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/120/oped/Defense_CEOs_are_big_winners_of_Iraq_warP.shtml
CEO pay at Lockheed Martin went up from $5.8 million in 2000 to $25.3
million in 2002. It went up at General Dynamics (tanks and submarines) from
$5.7 million in 2001 to $15.2 million in 2002. It went up at Honeywell
(aircraft systems) from $12.9 million in 2000 to $45 million in 2002. It
went up at Northrop Grumman from $7.3 million in 2000 to $9.2 million in 2002.
Pay went up at Alliant (bullets and bombs) from $1.4 million in 2000 to
$10.5 million in 2002. It went up at Cardinal Health (medical supplies) from
$2.9 million in 2001 to $17.7 million in 2002. It went up at United Defense
Industries (guns and cannons) from $794,000 in 2000 to $2.7 million in 2002.
At Raytheon (missiles and bombs), it went from $8 million in 2000 down to
$2.6 million in 2001 and back up to $8.9 million in 2002.
----------------------------
"Pensions For Execs, Shaft For Workers"
http://www.ariannaonline.com/columns/files/043003.html
But no matter how battered their reputations may be, they still appear
determined to rescue themselves instead of their sinking ships. For today's
captains of industry, the maxim in a crisis seems to be: "To hell with the
women and children -- save the lifeboats for us!"
----------------------------
-- Hop-Frog (Mr. "No Comment" -- too busy catching flies!)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: How it gels
|
| (...) theories. This so-called "coverup" is nothing compared to a non-actionable 30-year-old mom&pop land deal or a sexual affair between two consenting adults. THOSE are the issues that the Liberal Media should be tackling. In all seriousness, I'm (...) (21 years ago, 1-May-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
4 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
