Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

Iraq reconstruction plans in 2003: A flat tax and a no smoking campaign. ((( s/m

Posted By: whorn on 2007-11-28
In Reply to:


Correction to This Article
A Sept. 17 article incorrectly said that one person who helped manage Iraq's budget had no background in accounting. The woman, described as the daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator, has a background in accounting but lacked experience managing the finances of a large organization.
Ties to GOP Trumped Know-How Among Staff Sent to Rebuild Iraq
Early U.S. Missteps in the Green Zone

By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 17, 2006; A01


Adapted from "Imperial Life in the Emerald City," by Rajiv Chandrasekaran, copyright Knopf 2006


After the fall of Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003, the opportunity to participate in the U.S.-led effort to reconstruct Iraq attracted all manner of Americans -- restless professionals, Arabic-speaking academics, development specialists and war-zone adventurers. But before they could go to Baghdad, they had to get past Jim O'Beirne's office in the Pentagon.


To pass muster with O'Beirne, a political appointee who screens prospective political appointees for Defense Department posts, applicants didn't need to be experts in the Middle East or in post-conflict reconstruction. What seemed most important was loyalty to the Bush administration.


O'Beirne's staff posed blunt questions to some candidates about domestic politics: Did you vote for George W. Bush in 2000? Do you support the way the president is fighting the war on terror? Two people who sought jobs with the U.S. occupation authority said they were even asked their views on Roe v. Wade .


Many of those chosen by O'Beirne's office to work for the Coalition Provisional Authority, which ran Iraq's government from April 2003 to June 2004, lacked vital skills and experience. A 24-year-old who had never worked in finance -- but had applied for a White House job -- was sent to reopen Baghdad's stock exchange. The daughter of a prominent neoconservative commentator and a recent graduate from an evangelical university for home-schooled children were tapped to manage Iraq's $13 billion budget, even though they didn't have a background in accounting.


The decision to send the loyal and the willing instead of the best and the brightest is now regarded by many people involved in the 3 1/2 -year effort to stabilize and rebuild Iraq as one of the Bush administration's gravest errors. Many of those selected because of their political fidelity spent their time trying to impose a conservative agenda on the postwar occupation, which sidetracked more important reconstruction efforts and squandered goodwill among the Iraqi people, according to many people who participated in the reconstruction effort.


The CPA had the power to enact laws, print currency, collect taxes, deploy police and spend Iraq's oil revenue. It had more than 1,500 employees in Baghdad at its height, working under America's viceroy in Iraq, L. Paul Bremer, but never released a public roster of its entire staff.


Interviews with scores of former CPA personnel over the past two years depict an organization that was dominated -- and ultimately hobbled -- by administration ideologues.


"We didn't tap -- and it should have started from the White House on down -- just didn't tap the right people to do this job," said Frederick Smith, who served as the deputy director of the CPA's Washington office. "It was a tough, tough job. Instead we got people who went out there because of their political leanings."


Endowed with $18 billion in U.S. reconstruction funds and a comparatively quiescent environment in the immediate aftermath of the U.S. invasion, the CPA was the U.S. government's first and best hope to resuscitate Iraq -- to establish order, promote rebuilding and assemble a viable government, all of which, experts believe, would have constricted the insurgency and mitigated the chances of civil war. Many of the basic tasks Americans struggle to accomplish today in Iraq -- training the army, vetting the police, increasing electricity generation -- could have been performed far more effectively in 2003 by the CPA.


But many CPA staff members were more interested in other things: in instituting a flat tax, in selling off government assets, in ending food rations and otherwise fashioning a new nation that looked a lot like the United States. Many of them spent their days cloistered in the Green Zone, a walled-off enclave in central Baghdad with towering palms, posh villas, well-stocked bars and resort-size swimming pools.


By the time Bremer departed in June 2004, Iraq was in a precarious state. The Iraqi army, which had been dissolved and refashioned by the CPA, was one-third the size he had pledged it would be. Seventy percent of police officers had not been screened or trained. Electricity generation was far below what Bremer had promised to achieve. And Iraq's interim government had been selected not by elections but by Americans. Divisive issues were to be resolved later on, increasing the chances that tension over those matters would fuel civil strife.


To recruit the people he wanted, O'Beirne sought résumés from the offices of Republican congressmen, conservative think tanks and GOP activists. He discarded applications from those his staff deemed ideologically suspect, even if the applicants possessed Arabic language skills or postwar rebuilding experience.


Smith said O'Beirne once pointed to a young man's résumé and pronounced him "an ideal candidate." His chief qualification was that he had worked for the Republican Party in Florida during the presidential election recount in 2000.


O'Beirne, a former Army officer who is married to prominent conservative commentator Kate O'Beirne, did not respond to requests for comment.


He and his staff used an obscure provision in federal law to hire many CPA staffers as temporary political appointees, which exempted the interviewers from employment regulations that prohibit questions about personal political beliefs.


There were a few Democrats who wound up getting jobs with the CPA, but almost all of them were active-duty soldiers or State Department Foreign Service officers. Because they were career government employees, not temporary hires, O'Beirne's office could not query them directly about their political leanings.


One former CPA employee who had an office near O'Beirne's wrote an e-mail to a friend describing the recruitment process: "I watched résumés of immensely talented individuals who had sought out CPA to help the country thrown in the trash because their adherence to 'the President's vision for Iraq' (a frequently heard phrase at CPA) was 'uncertain.' I saw senior civil servants from agencies like Treasury, Energy . . . and Commerce denied advisory positions in Baghdad that were instead handed to prominent RNC (Republican National Committee) contributors."


As more and more of O'Beirne's hires arrived in the Green Zone, the CPA's headquarters in Hussein's marble-walled former Republican Palace felt like a campaign war room. Bumper stickers and mouse pads praising President Bush were standard desk decorations. In addition to military uniforms and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" garb, "Bush-Cheney 2004" T-shirts were among the most common pieces of clothing.


"I'm not here for the Iraqis," one staffer noted to a reporter over lunch. "I'm here for George Bush."


When Gordon Robison, who worked in the Strategic Communications office, opened a care package from his mother to find a book by Paul Krugman, a liberal New York Times columnist, people around him stared. "It was like I had just unwrapped a radioactive brick," he recalled.

Finance Background Not Required

Twenty-four-year-old Jay Hallen was restless. He had graduated from Yale two years earlier, and he didn't much like his job at a commercial real-estate firm. His passion was the Middle East, and although he had never been there, he was intrigued enough to take Arabic classes and read histories of the region in his spare time.


He had mixed feelings about the war in Iraq, but he viewed the American occupation as a ripe opportunity. In the summer of 2003, he sent an e-mail to Reuben Jeffrey III, whom he had met when applying for a White House job a year earlier. Hallen had a simple query for Jeffrey, who was working as an adviser to Bremer: Might there be any job openings in Baghdad?


"Be careful what you wish for," Jeffrey wrote in response. Then he forwarded Hallen's resume to O'Beirne's office.


Three weeks later, Hallen got a call from the Pentagon. The CPA wanted him in Baghdad. Pronto. Could he be ready in three to four weeks?


The day he arrived in Baghdad, he met with Thomas C. Foley, the CPA official in charge of privatizing state-owned enterprises. (Foley, a major Republican Party donor, went to Harvard Business School with President Bush.) Hallen was shocked to learn that Foley wanted him to take charge of reopening the stock exchange.


"Are you sure?" Hallen said to Foley. "I don't have a finance background."


It's fine, Foley replied. He told Hallen that he was to be the project manager. He would rely on other people to get things done. He would be "the main point of contact."


Before the war, Baghdad's stock exchange looked nothing like its counterparts elsewhere in the world. There were no computers, electronic displays or men in colorful coats scurrying around on the trading floor. Trades were scrawled on pieces of paper and noted on large blackboards. If you wanted to buy or sell, you came to the exchange yourself and shouted your order to one of the traders. There was no air-conditioning. It was loud and boisterous. But it worked. Private firms raised hundreds of thousands of dollars by selling stock, and ordinary people learned about free enterprise.


The exchange was gutted by looters after the war. The first wave of American economic reconstruction specialists from the Treasury Department ignored it. They had bigger issues to worry about: paying salaries, reopening the banks, stabilizing the currency. But the brokers wanted to get back to work and investors wanted their money, so the CPA made the reopening a priority.


Quickly absorbing the CPA's ambition during the optimistic days before the insurgency flared, Hallen decided that he didn't just want to reopen the exchange, he wanted to make it the best, most modern stock market in the Arab world. He wanted to promulgate a new securities law that would make the exchange independent of the Finance Ministry, with its own bylaws and board of directors. He wanted to set up a securities and exchange commission to oversee the market. He wanted brokers to be licensed and listed companies to provide financial disclosures. He wanted to install a computerized trading and settlement system.


Iraqis cringed at Hallen's plan. Their top priority was reopening the exchange, not setting up computers or enacting a new securities law. "People are broke and bewildered," broker Talib Tabatabai told Hallen. "Why do you want to create enemies? Let us open the way we were."


Tabatabai, who held a doctorate in political science from Florida State University, believed Hallen's plan was unrealistic. "It was something so fancy, so great, that it couldn't be accomplished," he said.


But Hallen was convinced that major changes had to be enacted. "Their laws and regulations were completely out of step with the modern world," he said. "There was just no transparency in anything. It was more of a place for Saddam and his friends to buy up private companies that they otherwise didn't have a stake in."


Opening the stock exchange without legal and structural changes, Hallen maintained, "would have been irresponsible and short-sighted."


To help rewrite the securities law, train brokers and purchase the necessary computers, Hallen recruited a team of American volunteers. In the spring of 2004, Bremer approved the new law and simultaneously appointed the nine Iraqis selected by Hallen to become the exchange's board of governors.


The exchange's board selected Tabatabai as its chairman. The new securities law that Hallen had nursed into life gave the board control over the exchange's operations, but it didn't say a thing about the role of the CPA adviser. Hallen assumed that he'd have a part in decision-making until the handover of sovereignty. Tabatabai and the board, however, saw themselves in charge.


Tabatabai and the other governors decided to open the market as soon as possible. They didn't want to wait several more months for the computerized trading system to be up and running. They ordered dozens of dry-erase boards to be installed on the trading floor. They used such boards to keep track of buying and selling prices before the war, and that's how they'd do it again.


The exchange opened two days after Hallen's tour in Iraq ended. Brokers barked orders to floor traders, who used their trusty white boards. Transactions were recorded not with computers but with small chits written in ink. CPA staffers stayed away, afraid that their presence would make the stock market a target for insurgents.


When Tabatabai was asked what would have happened if Hallen hadn't been assigned to reopen the exchange, he smiled. "We would have opened months earlier. He had grand ideas, but those ideas did not materialize," Tabatabai said of Hallen. "Those CPA people reminded me of Lawrence of Arabia."

'Loyalist' Replaces Public Health Expert

The hiring of Bremer's most senior advisers was settled upon at the highest levels of the White House and the Pentagon. Some, like Foley, were personally recruited by Bush. Others got their jobs because an influential Republican made a call on behalf of a friend or trusted colleague.


That's what happened with James K. Haveman Jr., who was selected to oversee the rehabilitation of Iraq's health care system.


Haveman, a 60-year-old social worker, was largely unknown among international health experts, but he had connections. He had been the community health director for the former Republican governor of Michigan, John Engler, who recommended him to Paul D. Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of defense.


Haveman was well-traveled, but most of his overseas trips were in his capacity as a director of International Aid, a faith-based relief organization that provided health care while promoting Christianity in the developing world. Before his stint in government, Haveman ran a large Christian adoption agency in Michigan that urged pregnant women not to have abortions.


Haveman replaced Frederick M. Burkle Jr., a physician with a master's degree in public health and postgraduate degrees from Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth and the University of California at Berkeley. Burkle taught at the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, where he specialized in disaster-response issues, and he was a deputy assistant administrator at the U.S. Agency for International Development, which sent him to Baghdad immediately after the war.


He had worked in Kosovo and Somalia and in northern Iraq after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. A USAID colleague called him the "single most talented and experienced post-conflict health specialist working for the United States government."


But a week after Baghdad's liberation, Burkle was informed he was being replaced. A senior official at USAID sent Burkle an e-mail saying the White House wanted a "loyalist" in the job. Burkle had a wall of degrees, but he didn't have a picture with the president.


Haveman arrived in Iraq with his own priorities. He liked to talk about the number of hospitals that had reopened since the war and the pay raises that had been given to doctors instead of the still-decrepit conditions inside the hospitals or the fact that many physicians were leaving for safer, better paying jobs outside Iraq. He approached problems the way a health care administrator in America would: He focused on preventive measures to reduce the need for hospital treatment.


He urged the Health Ministry to mount an anti-smoking campaign, and he assigned an American from the CPA team -- who turned out to be a closet smoker himself -- to lead the public education effort. Several members of Haveman's staff noted wryly that Iraqis faced far greater dangers in their daily lives than tobacco. The CPA's limited resources, they argued, would be better used raising awareness about how to prevent childhood diarrhea and other fatal maladies.


Haveman didn't like the idea that medical care in Iraq was free. He figured Iraqis should pay a small fee every time they saw a doctor. He also decided to allocate almost all of the Health Ministry's $793 million share of U.S. reconstruction funds to renovating maternity hospitals and building new community medical clinics. His intention, he said, was "to shift the mind-set of the Iraqis that you don't get health care unless you go to a hospital."


But his decision meant there were no reconstruction funds set aside to rehabilitate the emergency rooms and operating theaters at Iraqi hospitals, even though injuries from insurgent attacks were the country's single largest public health challenge.


Haveman also wanted to apply American medicine to other parts of the Health Ministry. Instead of trying to restructure the dysfunctional state-owned firm that imported and distributed drugs and medical supplies to hospitals, he decided to try to sell it to a private company.


To prepare it for a sale, he wanted to attempt something he had done in Michigan. When he was the state's director of community health, he sought to slash the huge amount of money Michigan spent on prescription drugs for the poor by limiting the medications doctors could prescribe for Medicaid patients. Unless they received an exemption, physicians could only prescribe drugs that were on an approved list, known as a formulary.


Haveman figured the same strategy could bring down the cost of medicine in Iraq. The country had 4,500 items on its drug formulary. Haveman deemed it too large. If private firms were going to bid for the job of supplying drugs to government hospitals, they needed a smaller, more manageable list. A new formulary would also outline new requirements about where approved drugs could be manufactured, forcing Iraq to stop buying medicines from Syria, Iran and Russia, and start buying from the United States.


He asked the people who had drawn up the formulary in Michigan whether they wanted to come to Baghdad. They declined. So he beseeched the Pentagon for help. His request made its way to the Defense Department's Pharmacoeconomic Center in San Antonio.


A few weeks later, three formulary experts were on their way to Iraq.


The group was led by Theodore Briski, a balding, middle-aged pharmacist who held the rank of lieutenant commander in the U.S. Navy. Haveman's order, as Briski remembered it, was: "Build us a formulary in two weeks and then go home." By his second day in Iraq, Briski came to three conclusions. First, the existing formulary "really wasn't that bad." Second, his mission was really about "redesigning the entire Iraqi pharmaceutical procurement and delivery system, and that was a complete change of scope -- on a grand scale." Third, Haveman and his advisers "really didn't know what they were doing."


Haveman "viewed Iraq as Michigan after a huge attack," said George Guszcza, an Army captain who worked on the CPA's health team. "Somehow if you went into the ghettos and projects of Michigan and just extended it out for the entire state -- that's what he was coming to save."


Haveman's critics, including more than a dozen people who worked for him in Baghdad, contend that rewriting the formulary was a distraction. Instead, they said, the CPA should have focused on restructuring, but not privatizing, the drug-delivery system and on ordering more emergency shipments of medicine to address shortages of essential medicines. The first emergency procurement did not occur until early 2004, after the Americans had been in Iraq for more than eight months.


Haveman insisted that revising the formulary was a crucial first step in improving the distribution of medicines. "It was unwieldy to order 4,500 different drugs, and to test and distribute them," he said.


When Haveman left Iraq, Baghdad's hospitals were as decrepit as the day the Americans arrived. At Yarmouk Hospital, the city's largest, rooms lacked the most basic equipment to monitor a patient's blood pressure and heart rate, operating theaters were without modern surgical tools and sterile implements, and the pharmacy's shelves were bare.


Nationwide, the Health Ministry reported that 40 percent of the 900 drugs it deemed essential were out of stock in hospitals. Of the 32 medicines used in public clinics for the management of chronic diseases, 26 were unavailable.


The new health minister, Aladin Alwan, beseeched the United Nations for help, and he asked neighboring nations to share what they could. He sought to increase production at a state-run manufacturing plant in the city of Samarra. And he put the creation of a new formulary on hold. To him, it was a fool's errand.


"We didn't need a new formulary. We needed drugs," he said. "But the Americans did not understand that."

A 9/11 Hero's Public Relations Blitz

In May 2003, a team of law enforcement experts from the Justice Department concluded that more than 6,600 foreign advisers were needed to help rehabilitate Iraq's police forces.


The White House dispatched just one: Bernie Kerik.


Bernard Kerik had more star power than Bremer and everyone else in the CPA combined. Soldiers stopped him in the halls of the Republican Palace to ask for his autograph or, if they had a camera, a picture. Reporters were more interested in interviewing him than they were the viceroy.


Kerik had been New York City's police commissioner when terrorists attacked the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001. His courage (he shouted evacuation orders from a block away as the south tower collapsed), his stamina (he worked around the clock and catnapped in his office for weeks), and his charisma (he was a master of the television interview) turned him into a national hero. When White House officials were casting about for a prominent individual to take charge of Iraq's Interior Ministry and assume the challenge of rebuilding the Iraqi police, Kerik's name came up. Bush pronounced it an excellent idea.


Kerik had worked in the Middle East before, as the security director for a government hospital in Saudi Arabia, but he was expelled from the country amid a government investigation into his surveillance of the medical staff. He lacked postwar policing experience, but the White House viewed that as an asset.


Veteran Middle East hands were regarded as insufficiently committed to the goal of democratizing the region. Post-conflict experts, many of whom worked for the State Department, the United Nations or nongovernmental organizations, were deemed too liberal. Men such as Kerik -- committed Republicans with an accomplished career in business or government -- were ideal. They were loyal, and they shared the Bush administration's goal of rebuilding Iraq in an American image. With Kerik, there were bonuses: The media loved him, and the American public trusted him.


Robert Gifford, a State Department expert in international law enforcement, was one of the first CPA staff members to meet Kerik when he arrived in Baghdad. Gifford was the senior adviser to the Interior Ministry, which oversaw the police. Kerik was to take over Gifford's job.


"I understand you are going to be the man, and we are here to support you," Gifford told Kerik.


"I'm here to bring more media attention to the good work on police because the situation is probably not as bad as people think it is," Kerik replied.


As they entered the Interior Ministry office in the palace, Gifford offered to brief Kerik. "It was during that period I realized he wasn't with me," Gifford recalled. "He didn't listen to anything. He hadn't read anything except his e-mails. I don't think he read a single one of our proposals."


Kerik wasn't a details guy. He was content to let Gifford figure out how to train Iraqi officers to work in a democratic society. Kerik would take care of briefing the viceroy and the media. And he'd be going out for a few missions himself.


Kerik's first order of business, less than a week after he arrived, was to give a slew of interviews saying the situation was improving. He told the Associated Press that security in Baghdad "is not as bad as I thought. Are bad things going on? Yes. But is it out of control? No. Is it getting better? Yes." He went on NBC's "Today" show to pronounce the situation "better than I expected." To Time magazine, he said that "people are starting to feel more confident. They're coming back out. Markets and shops that I saw closed one week ago have opened."


When it came to his own safety, Kerik took no chances. He hired a team of South African bodyguards, and he packed a 9mm handgun under his safari vest.


The first months after liberation were a critical period for Iraq's police. Officers needed to be called back to work and screened for Baath Party connections. They'd have to learn about due process, how to interrogate without torture, how to walk the beat. They required new weapons. New chiefs had to be selected. Tens of thousands more officers would have to be hired to put the genie of anarchy back in the bottle.


Kerik held only two staff meetings while in Iraq, one when he arrived and the other when he was being shadowed by a New York Times reporter, according to Gerald Burke, a former Massachusetts State Police commander who participated in the initial Justice Department assessment mission. Despite his White House connections, Kerik did not secure funding for the desperately needed police advisers. With no help on the way, the task of organizing and training Iraqi officers fell to U.S. military police soldiers, many of whom had no experience in civilian law enforcement.


"He was the wrong guy at the wrong time," Burke said later. "Bernie didn't have the skills. What we needed was a chief executive-level person. . . . Bernie came in with a street-cop mentality."


Kerik authorized the formation of a hundred-man Iraqi police paramilitary unit to pursue criminal syndicates that had formed since the war, and he often joined the group on nighttime raids, departing the Green Zone at midnight and returning at dawn, in time to attend Bremer's senior staff meeting, where he would crack a few jokes, describe the night's adventures and read off the latest crime statistics prepared by an aide. The unit did bust a few kidnapping gangs and car-theft rings, generating a stream of positive news stories that Kerik basked in and Bremer applauded. But the all-nighters meant Kerik wasn't around to supervise the Interior Ministry during the day. He was sleeping.


Several members of the CPA's Interior Ministry team wanted to blow the whistle on Kerik, but they concluded any complaints would be brushed off. "Bremer's staff thought he was the silver bullet," a member of the Justice Department assessment mission said. "Nobody wanted to question the [man who was] police chief during 9/11."


Kerik contended that he did his best in what was, ultimately, an untenable situation. He said he wasn't given sufficient funding to hire foreign police advisers or establish large-scale training programs.


Three months after he arrived, Kerik attended a meeting of local police chiefs in Baghdad's Convention Center. When it was his turn to address the group, he stood and bid everyone farewell. Although he had informed Bremer of his decision a few days earlier, Kerik hadn't told most of the people who worked for him. He flew out of Iraq a few hours later.


"I was in my own world," he said later. "I did my own thing."


© 2006 The Washington Post Company






Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

The state of Iraq in the mid-90's was a different story than 2003...sm
**In the *mid-1990s* President Clinton himself was talking about the very real POSSIBILITY of having to invade Iraq to take Saddam out.**

Clinton also ordered various air strikes, including suspected WMD sites, that weakened Saddam's army. We marched into Bagdad within two weeks with very few casualties. You can thank Clinton for that!

**To say we prematurely went into this war is naive at best and a downright untruth at worst.**

The war in Iraq may have been long overdue, as in should have been fought in the 80's and early 90's when the Kurds and other opposers were being slaughtered chemically, BUT in 2003 the debate over whether Iraq was the target to retaliate for the 9-11 attacks because of a) link to Al Quada, or b) WMD. This has all proved to be feeble, nonexistent, mistakes or lies. The genocide argument doesn't wash on why we are in Iraq because it only came up conveniently after the reason congress approved this war was MIA.
Bush only interested in Iraq, ག campaign

http://www.insightmag.com/Media/MediaManager/delegates.htm (a conservative site, no less!)


 


President Bush has decided to stay out of the lion's share of decisions made by his administration.


 


Sources close to the administration said that over the last year, Mr. Bush has chosen to focus on two issues, leaving the rest to be decided by Cabinet members and senior aides. They said the issues are Iraq and the Republican congressional campaign in the 2006 elections.


 


Lots of important issues that deal with national security are never brought to the president because he doesn't want to deal with them, a source familiar with the White House said. In some cases, this has resulted in chaos.


 


The White House has acknowledged that Mr. Bush was not informed of the administration’s decision to approve a $6.85 billion takeover by the United Arab Emirates of a British firm that operates at least six major ports in the United States. The decision triggered a public firestorm and strong bipartisan opposition on Capitol Hill. This prompted the Dubai-owned company last week to bail on its bid to operate terminals in U.S. ports.


 


Vice President Dick Cheney also was not informed of the approval of the port takeover by the state-owned Dubai Ports World. The process was administered by the Treasury Department-aligned Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which sparked opposition from most of the Republican leadership in Congress.


 


My take on this is that the president relied on his CFIUS board, this Committee on Foreign Investment; that they did a superficial scrub on this, House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter said on March 7.


 


They've been trained to be more of a business, or more of an arm of the administration which is designed to expedite or to shape acquisitions so that they can take place rather than to stop acquisitions, said Mr. Hunter, California Republican.


 


The sources said Mr. Bush's lack of involvement on most issues has led to numerous errors in judgment. They said the DP World episode was handled by the Treasury and Commerce departments. From there, the proposed sale was meant to have been relayed through the National Security Council for a White House decision.


 


It should have gone to Karl Rove and then gone up the chain, the source said. For some reason, it didn't. I don't think people understood how important this was in terms of both national security and politics.


 


Mr. Hunter and other members of the House Armed Services Committee were shocked over how little White House staffers knew of the security record of the UAE, cited in testimony to the 9/11 commission as having withheld cooperation regarding al Qaeda in 1999. Last week, Mr. Hunter and Rep. Jim Saxton, New Jersey Republican, brought evidence of how the UAE port of Dubai allowed shipments of nuclear components as well as heavy water and a precursor to nerve gas to countries such as Iran, Libya and Pakistan.


 


In 2003, Mr. Hunter said, Dubai allowed the shipment of 66 high-speed electrical switches designed to trigger and detonate nuclear weapons. He said Dubai rejected a U.S. request to stop the shipment.


 


The point is that if you are an outlaw regime, and you want to develop a nuclear weapons program, you have your components transshipped through Dubai, Mr. Hunter said. Dubai is a master at masking both the recipient of illegitimate weapons systems and the party that is sending, developing, selling those illegitimate weapons systems. I don't think those are the folks you want to have running your ports.


 


Neither Mr. Bush nor any of his aides ordered a change in CFIUS deliberations that would stress the security aspect of any foreign investments or operations in the United States. Mr. Saxton said the 9/11 attacks by al Qaeda had virtually no affect on the process.


 


The current system was designed, from what we can understand, to encourage foreign investment in our country, Mr. Saxton said. And 9/11 changed a lot of things, and CFIUS didn't change. And I guess it changed in some respects. We added a representative from the Department of Homeland Security, but it was still under the leadership of the Department of the Treasury. And so the mission of CFIUS remains pre-9/11, while the situation in post-9/11 is much different.


And that statement is ridiculous, Iran and Iraq enemies, remember the Iran-Iraq war? Iraq would jus
nm
That's start of the war in *2003* nm

I see these numbers are through 2003...sm
Had the conflict calmed down from 2003 - 2006?

Also, mind you, the death and injury toll I posted above is from this latest one month conflict alone.
It chronicles the first few months of 2003...
because the director of the movie is of the opinion that there were some bad decisions made at the get-go and the rest was a domino effect, and had those first few bad decisions not been made it might be a different story in Iraq. The director of this film was actually for going into Iraq...he just blames the bad decisions he illustrates for what is happening now. I saw him interviewed; I can't remember the show. But there are several articles on the net where he was interviewed and explains his position. At any rate...that is why only a few months are chronicled.
Umm...2003...isn't that the PAST, piglet....
I thought you were interested in NOW. :-)
This link went to a 2003 article....
5 years ago....not sure what you want to talk about?
2003 Rockefeller Memo

  


    The 2003 Rockefeller Memo:

Politicize the war, run down the country, sink Bush


Flat Tax

AW  -"I think 10% represents different things to different people and that 10% to someone earning $10,000 a year might be more of an encumbrance than it would to someone earning $10,000,000 a year."


I personally think the flat tax is a good idea because if a person makes 10,000 dollars a year they pay 1000 dollars, but if a person makes 10,000,000 dollars they pay 1 million. That's fair game to me.  If you were able to benefit 10,000,000 dollars from American entrepreneurship then I think you should pay your 10% in taxes, give back.  9,000,000 after taxes is not too shabby and a lot more than what they would have under the current system.  The more you make the more you should pay anyway.


I couldn't really grip the fair tax concept.  Maybe you can explain it to me more???? (to American Woman).


And that would be a flat out lie....(sm)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#31094044


Care to try again?


 


Bush didn't destroy Iraq. He helped to liberate Iraq.
m
Obama's campaign called McCain's campaign.
This was reported an hour or two before McCain had his little news conference.  Shouldn't take to heart too much of what McCain says as he is a known liar.
Some people also believe the world is flat.

Saying it is so or isn't so doesn't make it the truth.


Yes, Saddam was a face of terror, one of many in the world...and not just in the middle east.  Try Africa. 


The posting you don't believe has facts as stated by multiple investigations sponsored by the U.S. as well as countless Middle East and terror experts.  They appear to be the truth.  That Saddam was able to keep the lid on violence in his country is backed up by the history of Iraq under his reign.  Very easy to check on.


thanks for the link...yep, she flat out lied
Lying seems to be the whole premise of the McCain campaign and she jumped right on board!!!
We would gladly pay a 10% flat tax, which is quite fair to everyone
and should be instituted. Still see no one has an answer as to why we should be penalized, and not the standard answer of just stop whining and pay your fair share. We do, and more. The taxes that O wants to raise will hurt small business owners also. Are you willing to have your taxes raised?
Like I posted above, this is flat out false
He knows there is no way in heck he can do this. Like I said above, a state representative told me they don't even get those plans like the Senators do and other high officials in the white house and you won't be getting the choice of one either. He said the cost to us would be trillions of dollars to pay for it, those with insurance they are now paying for won't even be allowed to get on board, which he said Obama knows means those on the welfare roll will be the ones he will be trying to get the better healthcare plan for. Well, Obama must be in lah lah land because how are they going to pay for this plan on welfare? They won't.....you and I will but WE won't be getting that plan.


Attack story a flat-out lie. sm

http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/17789356/detail.html


 


 


The other **loving** statement Barbara Bush made in 2003

Ignorant fool that she is.


Why should we hear about body bags and deaths, Barbara Bush said on ABC's Good Morning America on March 18, 2003. Oh, I mean, it's not relevant. So why should I waste my beautiful mind on something like that?


With the flat tax, people who make under 40,000 per year will not have to
pay taxes the way it reads now. They estimate that people making over 40,000 will be able to produce more tax income than the current income tax w/o including people who make under 40,000.

Q and A about the Flat Tax.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/7146/flattax.html
Oh, before you call me a liar. I did respond to the flat tax,
but I brought my responses back here.
NEWS FLASH - Michelle wears flat shoes a lot!!
What in the world can we read into this?
What are you smoking?
You are correct that Repubs are just are culpable as Democrats - but that's in general - not just as pertains to our economic crisis. Our economic crisis is not AS SIMPLISTIC as blamining it on one party OR Both - that's third grade mentality!

As far as what MCBU$H will give us if he gets in - well even a third grader! knows we'll just have MORE WAR. In case you aren't clued into the COSTS of war and who pays for it - here's a clue: Iraq has a huge budgetary surplus currently while WE ARE pumping billions into that same country we pulverized while OUR OWN country is imploding.


Just how many more smoking guns
Good grief!

http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0330nj1.htm
Obama smoking
Hey GP, this is kind of off topic but on his smoking issue. DH told me last night about an article that Obama says he won't smoke in the white house. I remember being on this board awhile back when someone was arguing about JMs health and I said what about Obama's health because he smokes. I was literally screamed at that he quit smoking, stop bringing it up, and to "get over it". So I did, but now I hear that he never did quit smoking. Goes once more to show me that I don't trust anyone. They all lie to the public to get voted in (ALL of them). Some articles I read I like some of his plans (energy, etc), other times I read his plans and think "Lordy, lordy what in the world is he thinking".
Or - what exactly is she SMOKING? (Or drinking?)

If there are laws against smoking
at parks, your son's baseball park, or anywhere, marijuana wouldn't be allowed either, because it's also smoking.
What pipe are you smoking from? There is no

scientific evidence whatsoever that there is a gay gene? 


That was settled some time ago by the scientists.  NO GAY GENE.  Cannot be replicated in the laboratory anymore than replicating a monkey turning into a human and proving a basis for evolution.


New Anti-Smoking Law

President Obama knows all too well how difficult it is to quit smoking, and today he addressed his struggle to kick the habit just before signing a law he hopes will help other people put out their cigarettes too.


"Each day, 1,000 young people under the age of 18 become new, regular, daily smokers, and almost 90 percent of all smokers began at or before their 18th birthday," Obama said today. "I know. I was one of these teenagers. And so I know how difficult it can be to break this habit when it's been with you for a long time."


The new tobacco law gives the Food and Drug Administration authority to regulate tobacco in the same way the government regulates breakfast cereals and pharmaceuticals.


"This legislation is a victory for bipartisanship, and it was passed overwhelmingly in both houses of Congress," Obama said today. "It's a victory for health care reform, as it will reduce some of the billions we spend on tobacco-related health care costs in this country."


Public health organizations and many lawmakers, several of whom joined Obama today for the signing, have been fighting for regulation for nearly a decade in hopes of helping an estimated 45 million adult smokers in the United States to kick their habit.


The law means the government will have the power to decide how cigarettes are advertised and monitor how they're promoted to young people. It means cigarette makers will be required to include new, larger warning graphics with more health information on their products and will be prohibited from using words like "light" and "low tar" in their marketing.


While the law does not have the power to ban cigarettes and nicotine outright, it does allow the FDA to reduce nicotine levels and harmful chemicals in tobacco products.


"Forty-five years after the first U.S. surgeon general's report linking cigarette smoking to lung cancer, the most deadly product sold in America will no longer be the least-regulated product sold in America," said Matthew Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, in a statement earlier this month when Congress passed the bill.


Within the year, a rule will also be reinstated that prohibits outdoor tobacco ads within 1,000 feet of schools and playgrounds, and bans tobacco brands from sponsoring sports and entertainment events, according to the law.


At the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, CEO John R. Seffrin said the changes "will finally put an end to Big Tobacco's despicable marketing practices that are designed to addict children to its deadly products."


Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius also pinned high hopes on the effort.


"This legislation is a key part of our plans to cut health care costs and reduce the number of Americans who smoke," Sebelius said in a June 11 statement.


According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 440,000 people die prematurely from smoking each year, with an estimated 49,000 of those deaths due to secondhand smoke exposure.


"This legislation provides a tremendous opportunity to finally hold tobacco companies accountable and restrict efforts to addict more children and adults," American Heart Association CEO Nancy Brown said in a June 11 statement. "It has been a long and challenging process to move the bill through Congress but the determination of many concerned parents and supporters has never wavered."


Please stop smoking that stuff...
it is interfering with your cognitive ability to THINK. This crock has been refuted A LONG TIME AGO. Please get with the program.
Are you smoking that wacky weed again?
Where ever did you get such ideas?  I don't have a job, don't want one and certainly don't need government assistance so why don't you unbristle your hackles.  Not hard to see why you support McCain/Palin.........extremely short on facts ye  are.
There are a lot of anti-smoking laws
I did not realize this was an old campaign. It seemed like a modern idea when the surgeon general came out in 1969 against smoking.
Obama lied about smoking too....... sm
Are you going to be watching for what else he lied about?

Barack Obama was on Meet the Press Sunday, and moderator Tom Brokaw put the president-elect's feet to the fire: MR. BROKAW: Finally, Mr. President-elect, the White House is a no-smoking zone, and when you were asked about this recently by Barbara Walters, I read it very carefully, you ducked. Have you stopped smoking? PRES.-ELECT OBAMA: You know, I have, but what I said was that, you know, there are...

http://www.eaglevuedaily.com/?p=224

While I agree that the obesity and smoking....... sm
are just more pork that needs to be cut, don't you realize that providing these programs will create jobs?

Wonder if they got rid of the provisions for dog and frisbee parks yet?
How can you compare smoking cigarettes with being
homosexual? Smoking is not a sin, being homosexual is.
These are no comparable issues.
Obama quit smoking at the start of his...sm
Campaign, so worry no more. (I think Obama smoked 1/2 to 1 pack a day.)

McCain is also a former smoker - 2 packs a day. How long either of them smoked, I don't know, but they are BOTH former smokers.

As far as the "radicals and communists" comment, you don't think McCain has "associated with" plenty of questionable people in his decades in government? I do.
Smoking is way worse than junk food.......nm
xxx
If O didn't want to quit smoking, tobacco wouldn't be an
nm
His plans are just that....plans.
Besides, I don't think he can actually even try to do any of his plans with the way things are now.  The economy just won't allow it.  We can't afford any government programs or universal health care.  The USA has no money.  Even if he just taxed the rich more, which I doubt it will just limited to the rich, that still wouldn't be enough money to pay for these government programs.  It won't happen....it can't and if it does, we will all pay for it because all taxes will go up.
I sincerely hope that whatever the tarhooties you were smoking to make that baseless statement
is the last of your stash..
Cheaper plans -- $107 to $220
There are cheaper plans for the child, just checked and they range from 107 with 1000 deductible up to 220 for HMO.  I had to go without health insurance for a long while after getting divorced and getting my life back together, did not ask the government to come in and save me and at an older age, have a lot more chance of medical problems than young kids.  When I was a kid there was no health insurance, hardly went to the doctor.  I just feel that middle income people (over 80,000) can afford to support their kids with insurance.  Do not carry it on yourself and cover your kids if you feel so adamant about it.  And as for the cigarette tax covering it, once they find out the administation cost of it, then they will have to tax the rest of us to fund it.  Also every government plan starts out great and then they cut the benefits to the doctors as they don't have the money and pretty soon there are no doctors that will accept those patients.  Seen it time and time again.   But like someone else said, give a credit to the family once they pay the premiums for their kids.   Government taking care of us is not the answer, at least to me it isn't.
Plans for CHANGE! LOL
x
What are Obama's plans now?

I never believed that BO's plans would work to benefit our country, but now he can't even start his plans if he is elected.  This economy is too out of wack and the government has NO money.  So how does Barry expect to keep his promises he has made during his campaign?  We can't afford more government programs.  It just is not possible.  So much for that hope he keeps talking about.


I admit that the promise of change is an attractive idea, but I have yet to hear any "plan" of Barry's that will actually bring change worth voting for.  Voting for him initially would have raised government spending and taxes.  Now that the country is in deep financial crisis....what does he propose now?  I haven't heard much of significance out of him to suggest he really will bring about change....or I should say change for the better.


CHANGE WE CAN FEAR.....Barrack Hussein Obama


help with 2 Obama plans
I have found 2 things I need help understanding that were proposed by Senator Obama and am wondering if someone can shed light on what these proposals are. One is "universal national public service" (also spoken about by Michelle Obama in a recent speech) and the other is "civilian national security force." From what I have read, they sound scary, but I am not sure I understand either. Anybody know anything about these?
me too - who else plans to quit
Why work. There are no incentives. Why should I work when my money will be taken and given to people like Peggy Joseph who stated she won't have to work to buy gas and she won't have to work to pay her mortgage.


I did not say I did not agree with his plans -
I said we are not all looking for handouts... Of course, some people believe that is what he is going to do - I for one do not believe he is going to give "handouts".

I also don't consider tax cuts handouts, I don't consider helping people go to school handouts.

And, I very much LOVE the idea of not rewarding companies for sending our jobs overseas and for giving tax incentives to the companies who keep our jobs in the states.

I love the fact that I will not have to itemize my taxes to get to count my mortgage interest off on my taxes - why should some people be able to claim that credit and others not be able to?

I love the fact that he stands for a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body...

I love the fact that he is going to work toward getting affordable insurance for all people and not have to depend on an employer to provide you some type of coverage...

I never said I did not agree with his plan - just that I interpret his plans different than you.


Congress looks at Big 3 plans...... sm

Congress has looked at the Big 3's plans to cut costs in order to "qualify" for a bailout, the amount of which has now grown to $34B.  Nancy Pelosi seems to be in favor, so my bet is they will get it. 

Some of the concessions the auto makers are ready to make is slashing the executive pay, getting rid of executive bonuses, postponing employee merit raises for next year, suspending health care payments into a union health care plan, and possibly getting rid of the controversial job banks. 

Ford said they only wanted a standby line of credit with the government in case the other two go belly up.  GM seems to be the one hurting the most. 

I really have to wonder, will a bailout REALLY help or will it just postpone the inevitable with the rest of the economy dying the way it is???? 

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97737508&ft=1&f=1001


Went on with thier plans...
with the blessing of folks like Nancy Pelosi. This is hardly a Pres. Bush problem or a republican problem. Obama digs much further and I think we'll find there are more people in Congress that knew about it and either agreed with it or did nothing about it, on both sides of the isle. Is he going to prosecute everyone?

That would be a sight!
Other plans out there make more sense

I've been researching other candidates and their plans.


On the Dem side - Kucinich has a plan for only one insurance provider to everyone.  Sends all the bloodsucking insurance companies and their "preexisting conditions" and "not medically necessary" straight out of business.  I kinda like that plan, as I used to do billing and it would sure cut through a ton of red tape for doctors, hospitals, their staff and the patients.


On the Rep side - Huckabee has a plan that does away with employers providing insurance.  That's kind of scary, as "pooling" to get better insurance rates has always been the cheaper way to go.


But any plan I've seen doesn't worry me as much as Hillary's!


Anybody else who has heard of a candidate with a good plan, please chime in!


i'm curious about both sides as far as plans
x
I disagree. I think Obama's plans

will be the one to further hurt our country.  However, if I am wrong (and if O wins I hope I am wrong), I will give Obama credit if and when it is due.  Until then, I stand by what I believe.  Raising taxes during a financial crisis like this will ruin us.  Taxing businesses more will only make our products and services cost more which WE will pay for.  And as much money as Obama is wanting the government to spend on his programs, he will have to tax more than the rich to cover his expenses.


Cut taxes and cut government spending!!!!  Not the other way around.