Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"What's REALLY behind the WH Stonewall over Bolton documents?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
AnnInLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 06:34 AM
Original message
"What's REALLY behind the WH Stonewall over Bolton documents?
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/004522.php

What's Really Behind The White House Stonewall Over Bolton Documents?

Perhaps we know now why the White House is fighting so furiously to prevent the Senate Intelligence Committee from getting all of the documents wanted by committee Democrats to evaluate the fitness of John Bolton to be our UN ambassador. According to Wednesday’s New York Times previewed in the International Herald Tribune, it has been leaked by administration sources that what the White House is refusing to release to the committee are reports that Bolton obtained from the NSA by way of a special request. And what is in those reports?

The names of American individuals and companies that may have violated export restriction bans on the shipment of dangerous weapons material to China, Libya, and even Iran. And is it too big of a leap to assume that some or all of these firms may prove to be very damaging to the White House, as campaign contributors?

Some of the information that the White House has refused to provide to Congress for its review of the nomination of John Bolton includes the names of American companies mentioned in intelligence reports on commerce with China and other countries covered by export restrictions, say government officials who have been briefed on the documents. The fact that the documents also included the names of American companies, and that the subject had to do with possible violations of American export restrictions, provides a new clue as to why the White House might be rebuffing the congressional requests.



snip



The government officials who described the intelligence reports declined to speak for the record, citing the classified nature of the documents and the extraordinary political sensitivity surrounding them. They would not say what countries other than China might have been the subject of the reports, but noted that Bolton's responsibilities also included monitoring efforts to prevent Iran, Libya and other countries from acquiring dangerous weapons.



So which companies are Bush and Dick (Mr. Halliburton Doing Business with Saddam) Cheney trying to protect here, and how many of them are major Bush/Cheney campaign contributors? Do you remember the stink that GOP congressman Christopher Cox raised with the allegations that Clinton sold our secrets to the Chinese for campaign contributions? What happens to Bush and the GOP if it turns out that major GOP contributors violated the export ban to China, Iran, Libya, and other countries? And what happens to Bolton if it is found out that he acquired this information and told others about it, possibly even the companies involved, in violation of national security protocols?



more at link above

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
devinsgram Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 06:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. It must be dynamite.
And enough to blow them out of the water.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakeme2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 06:55 AM
Response to Original message
2. Bolton getting NSA to spy on Americans
The WHO is what I think they are hiding. One name I heard was President Carter. Why in the hell would Bolton want to know details of what President Carter said to anybody???????????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 06:59 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. Could Neil or Marvin Bush be named in those documents?
Hell, haven't they always been up to a lot of BushCo funny business with China?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wakeme2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 07:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. blackmail would also fit Bolton
Neil .... kids... sex for contracts... Bolton has the goods...

this would all fit the Bolton I have heard about...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 07:02 AM
Response to Original message
4. this theory is walking like a duck!
It makes sense on many fronts..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnInLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 07:15 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Yes, that is a good point
Many fronts. Sure wish we had a "deep throat" to publicize these documents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harlinchi Donating Member (954 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
7. How much you wanna bet that...
...everyone's favorite violator, Halliburton, is on the list? I mean, they dealt with Iraq, despite sanctions, they operate tax-free (to some extent) offshore and it appears that the VP facilitated an unheard of 10-year, exclusive, worldwide, profit-guaranteed contract for them. They've screwed our troops in combat, overcharged our government for stuff they got free and got a bonus from the government to boot!

Just as the Galloway mis-information supplied by the senator from Minnesota blocked out US violators of the Oil-For-Food program, attempting by fraud to implicate others, I'd suspect the Bolton documents show the extent to which certain (read GOP-supporting) US companies were able to violate sanctions with respect to other countries. Now the president wishes to cover up for those US companies? He'll spend his political capital (the few remaining pennies) preventing legitimate requests from our Senate? If this refusal to provide requested documents continues and is not mentioned loudly by the media , I think the media itself would need to be investigated to determine the extent to which the seven companies which own our media are related to those violators. Are GE, ADM and Kerr-McGee related? Are they connected to CBS or NBC? What are AOL/Time-Warner's oil interests? Are they or their subsidiaries profiting from the various scandals existing (Iraq, Iraq profiteering, Oil-For-Food, sanction-busting, etc.)?

The Telecommunication Act which allowed the consolidation of media needs to be repealed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
corbett Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-01-05 08:10 AM
Response to Original message
8. 2 Questions
1) Why haven't the details of this first divorce been pounced on? I mean, sure, I know why the MEDIA hasn't tapped that source but what about the Senate Democrats?

2) How is KKKarl able to get away with blocking the release of the documents when STAFFERS already have seen them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 04:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC