Tag Archive: Bill Clinton
Revealed: The forgotten treaty which could drag the US and UK into WAR with Russia if Putin’s troops intervene in Ukraine
The agreement sees signatories promise to protect Ukraine’s borders
It was signed by Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma in 1994
Ukrainian parliament has now reached out directly to all the countries who signed the treaty
Putin currently has 150,000 troops on Ukraine’s borders and it is reported some have crossed into the country
President Obama says he is ‘deeply concerned’ by the news
The US and Britain have both made ‘crisis calls’ to President Putin to warn him to respect territorial boundaries
A treaty signed in 1994 by the US and Britain could pull both countries into a war to protect Ukraine if President Putin’s troops cross into the country.
Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma – the then-rulers of the USA, UK, Russia and Ukraine – agreed to the The Budapest Memorandum as part of the denuclearization of former Soviet republics after the dissolution of the Soviet Union.
Technically it means that if Russia has invaded Ukraine then it would be difficult for the US and Britain to avoid going to war.
The revelation comes as reports suggest the Kremlin was moving up to 2,000 troops across the Black Sea from Novorossiysk to their fleet base at Sevastopol.
At least 20 men wearing the uniform of the Russian fleet and carrying automatic rifles surrounded a Ukrainian border guard post in a standoff near the port yesterday.
The Budapest Memorandum was signed in 1991 by Bill Clinton, John Major, Boris Yeltsin and Leonid Kuchma – the then-rulers of the USA, UK, Russia and Ukraine. It promises to protect Ukraine’s borders, in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons
Last night it was still unclear the exact scale of Russian boots on the ground in Crimea or the identity of gunmen who have taken over airports in Simferopol and Sevastopol – though reports suggest they are Russian marines or Moscow- controlled militias.
The action came as President Obama delivered blunt warnings to Moscow.
‘We are now deeply concerned by reports of military movements taken by the Russian Federation inside of Ukraine,’ he told reporters at the White House.
‘Any violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity would be deeply destabilizing,’ he said in a brief appearance.
‘The United States will stand with the international community in affirming that there will be costs for any military intervention in Ukraine.’
U.S. officials also said the President could scrap plans to attend an international summit in Russia and take negotiations on deepening trade ties with the country off the table in response to Russian involvement in the Ukraine.
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel added: “This could be a very dangerous situation if this continues in a provocative way.”
Asked about options in a CBS News interview, he said that “We’re trying to deal with a diplomatic focus, that’s the appropriate, responsible approach.”
Both the U.S. and the UK are advising against all non-essential trips to Ukraine – especially Crimea.
former British Ambassador to Moscow Sir Tony Brenton, who served as British Ambassador from 2004 to 2008, said in an interview that war could be an option ‘if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding.’
NATO also asked Russia not to take action that could escalate tension. However Moscow responded by telling the organization to ‘refrain’ from provocative statements on Ukraine and respect its ‘non-bloc’ status.
Sir Tony Brenton, who served as British Ambassador from 2004 to 2008, said that war could be an option ‘if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding.’
It promises to protect Ukraine’s borders, in return for Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons.
Kiev has demanded the agreement is activated after insisting their borders had been violated.
In response Mr Brenton said in a BBC radio interview: ‘If indeed this is a Russian invasion of Crimea and if we do conclude the [Budapest] Memorandum is legally binding then it’s very difficult to avoid the conclusion that we’re going to go to war with Russia’.
Ukraine accused Russia of a ‘military invasion and occupation’, saying Russian troops have taken up positions around a coast guard base and two airports on its strategic Crimea peninsula.
Russia kept silent on the accusations, as the crisis deepened between two of Europe’s largest countries.
Bill Clinton, other Democrats distance themselves from Obamacare
In a startling rebuke to President Obama, former President Bill Clinton and other Democrats picked apart Obamacare on Tuesday as privacy concerns about the program’s website multiplied and a video investigation suggested fraudulence among volunteers helping people enroll for government subsidies.
Mr. Clinton called on the president to make good on his repeated and emphatic promise that Americans who like their health insurance plans can keep them. The former president said Mr. Obama should take that step on behalf of consumers whose policies were canceled, “even if it takes a change in the law.”
The White House said Mr. Obama is considering a “range of options” but didn’t commit to Mr. Clinton’s proposal. In a reminder of Mr. Obama’s on-again, off-again relationship with Mr. Clinton, the president’s spokesman pointed out that Mr. Clinton tried and failed to enact universal health care.
The highly public rebuff prompted open speculation that Team Clinton has begun to distance itself from Mr. Obama in preparation for a presidential bid by Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2016. “And so starts the Clinton team slowly walking away from the train wreck that is the Obama presidency,” said John Feehery, a Republican strategist in Washington.
“A lot of Democrats that I’ve talked to all day are saying just do it — make the fix,” Mr. Davis said. In a column to be published in The Hill newspaper Thursday, Mr. Davis argues that Mr. Obama “might be well advised to admit to trying to do too much too soon in a 1,000+ page ObamaCare bill, passed by an almost entirely partisan vote in 2010 — and revert back to a step-by-step approach to increase required coverage over a longer period of time, in effect reinstating the guarantee that if you have insurance, you can keep your policies.”
“Such a mid-course correction could be a compromise worth trying — saving not only public support for ObamaCare but perhaps the Democratic control of the U.S. Senate in the 2014 elections as well,” he writes.
But a Democratic operative aligned with the Obama White House characterized Mr. Clinton’s comments as unhelpful, especially in light of a House vote scheduled for Friday to allow consumers to keep their health care plans.
“These comments leave rank-and-file Democrats on the Hill awfully exposed right now, especially in the House,” the Obama ally said. “Clinton has now made it a much tougher vote than it should be.”
In what could be the start of a Democratic stampede away from the president’s signature program, Sen. Kay R. Hagan of North Carolina said she plans to formally request a government investigation of Obamacare’s botched rollout. Mrs. Hagan, a Democrat whose re-election effort next year has been imperiled by her support of the law, said she wants to “make sure it never happens again.”
With the White House starting to lose Obamacare allies in the president’s own party, a video investigation bolstered Republicans’ concerns that the entitlement program is ripe for fraud. The video produced by James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas appears to show Obamacare “navigators” in Dallas advising a man to falsify his application to obtain higher government subsidies and a lower premium.
The encounter between a Project Veritas “investigator” and an Obamacare navigator was taped secretly at the National Urban League’s offices in Dallas. When the undercover investigator says he never reports outside income on his tax returns, the Obamacare volunteer advises him not to get in “trouble” by declaring the income now.
Other Obamacare navigators can be heard informing the man not to disclose that he smokes tobacco, so he can receive a lower insurance premium.
“You lie because your premiums will be higher,” an Obamacare navigator advises the Project Veritas investigator.
Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, called it “yet another broken piece of a deeply flawed system.”
The president admitted power and fame can ‘dim your vision’
He was speaking at a 100K bike ride attended by several injured veterans
Added he doesn’t ‘feel sorry for them’ and that they were ‘volunteers’ in war
By Daniel Bates
He was the most powerful man on the planet for eight years. Now former US president George W Bush has spoken frankly about the perils of leadership, saying holding on to power for too long can be ‘corrosive’.
Mr Bush, who served two terms in the White House, said he thought being in charge could ‘dim your vision’ because you get carried away with fame.
He admitted that while he was president he came to understand how ‘fame can become very addictive’.
Outspoken: President Bush said during a 100K bike ride he doesn’t feel sorry for injured vets. Here, the former president stands with one of the riders, retired Staff Sargent Matt DeWitt, who lost his arms on duty in Iraq
Mr Bush said: ‘I’ve had all the fame a man could want… I don’t long for [fame]. Nor do I long for power. I’ve come to realise that power can be corrosive if you’ve had it for too long.
‘It can dim your vision. And so I came to the conclusion that, you know, I don’t long for fame.’
He also confessed he has deliberately avoided the limelight since leaving office
It is unclear whether the comments will help to rehabilitate his image. A poll last year found he is the most unpopular living president, with 54 per cent saying they had an unfavourable view of him.
While 43 per cent said they did like him, this was low compared to the two-thirds who said they still liked former President Bill Clinton.
After he came into office in 2001, Mr Bush embarked on two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which have resulted in the deaths of 6,471 American troops. Some 32,000 US soldiers were injured in Iraq and 18,000 in Afghanistan.
At least 132,000 civilians have died in both conflicts.
‘Bad consequences': Bush, riding with a veteran above, said he knew the injuries many veterans suffer from were part of the ‘bad consequences to war’
- Biking With Bush: Former President Reflects On War’s Legacy (huffingtonpost.com)
- George W. Bush Discusses Leaving Spotlight Behind (huffingtonpost.com)
- ‘I don’t feel sorry for them': Bush risks wrath of injured veterans saying he has no sympathy because they volunteered their service (sott.net)
- George Bush Is Right: You Can’t Feel Sorry for People Who Don’t Feel Sorry for Themselves. (katenews2day.com)
- “Fame can become very addictive. And I’ve had all the fame a man could want.” (althouse.blogspot.com)
- Bush hosts 2nd day of bike ride for veterans (kvue.com)
- Bush Administration Convicted of War Crimes (counterinformation.wordpress.com)
- Bush Administration Convicted of War Crimes (fromthetrenchesworldreport.com)
If Bill Clinton’s lying about an indiscretion that took place in the White House led to Impeachment proceedings. Then how can anyone justify not taking the same course of action on a lie and the cover up of the death of 4 American citizens???
The consensus thus far had been that Obama’s failure to follow through on campaign promises was not an impeachable offense. The reason being that campaign promises are meant to be broken as they are just a means to an end. In other words they will say whatever the people want to hear to get elected. The comparison made on many occasions is that one cannot compare what Clinton did to what Obama had done because Clinton lied to the People directly and under oath. Well one wonders what the excuses will be now. Since Obama and his administration have lied at every turn to whitewash the part they played in the death of 4 Americans. They have lied to t he people directly and they have lied to Congress. I believe under oath is a definite factor to the latter, is it not , or am I mistaken ?
Now going a bit further we can couple the cover up with the slow and nefarious enroachment of the Federal government upon the Constitutional rights of the American People. Not only by proxy through pressure or self interest via the Congress. But also personally via Executive orders. Obama has slapped The People in the face every time he has sidestepped Congress and or signed an order infringing upon our rights. Being a Constitutional Attorney apparently has given him the delusion that he can re-write it as he sees fit to mold the Nation to a more acceptable America than the Founding Fathers envisioned.
If the manner in which he has blatantly lied, forfeited ,calculatedly twisted the truth and the opportunities to utilize them for the unfolding of a very personal agenda. Is not enough, If the statistics of the vanishing middle class as we watch the growing numbers of working poor and wealthy divide this Nation. If the looming class wars and economic devastation are not enough . Then I would like someone to tell me exactly what would be enough to bring this man to heel and remove him from power!!
~ Desert Rose ~
Huckabee: Benghazi Scandal Will Cost Obama His Presidency
Tuesday, 07 May 2013 11:25 AM
Influential Republicans are setting their sights on toppling the Obama administration as evidence of a cover-up over the assault on the Benghazi consulate gets stronger.
Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is now openly talking about impeachment, saying he does not believe Barack Obama will survive the remaining 3½ years of his presidency.
“When a president lies to the American people and is part of a cover-up, he cannot continue to govern,” Huckabee said on his radio show Monday.
“As the facts come out, I think we’re going to see something startling. And before it’s over, I don’t think this president will finish his term unless somehow they can delay it in Congress past the next 3½ years.”
Huckabee isn’t alone in his belief that Obama could be toppled. The pressure is growing just as Congressional hearings on the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks that left four Americans dead are due to start on Wednesday.
Rep. Darrell Issa of California, who will chair those hearings as chairman of the House Oversight Committee, said he intends to make the president “come clean.”
“The administration has made a claim that for classified reasons they changed the story,” Issa told Fox News’ Sean Hannity. “We believe right now that may be the biggest lie of all, and we intend on making the president come clean as to, quote, ‘What the classified reasons are that would justify lying to the American people.'”
Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina added to the onslaught against the administration’s handling of the assault.
“Political manipulation is rampant here,” said Graham in an interview with Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren. “The dam’s about to break on Benghazi.”
And former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton told Newsmax’s Steve Malzberg on Monday that he too believes the growing scandal could lead to the “unraveling” of the Obama administration.
- John Bolton: Benghazi Could Topple Administration (2ndamendmentright.org)
- Huckabee, Bolton: Obama Will Be Ousted Over Benghazi (joemiller.us)
- Mike Huckabee: Benghazi Scandal Will Cost Barack Obama His Presidency, ‘He Cannot Continue To Govern’ (midnightwatcher.wordpress.com)
- Obama will be ousted over Benghazi, Huckabee says (illinoisreview.typepad.com)
- John Bolton: Benghazi Could Topple Administration. (greatriversofhope.wordpress.com)
- Bengazi isn’t over… yet. (thebubbaeffect.wordpress.com)
- Huckabee: Benghazi Will Eventually Force Obama To Resign (jpupdates.com)
- Benghazi Scandal Set to Explode on Administration (joemiller.us)
- Huckabee: Obama will be ousted over Benghazi (wnd.com)
- Hints of explosive testimony in new Benghazi hearings (humanevents.com)
George W. Bush tops list of ex-presidents’ expenses in 2012 at $1.3 million
By JOSH LEDERMAN
Published: 26 March 2013 06:47 AM
WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Bill Clinton’s 8,300-square-foot Harlem office near the Apollo Theater costs taxpayers nearly $450,000. George W. Bush spends $85,000 on telephone fees, and another $60,000 on travel. Jimmy Carter sends $15,000 worth of postage – all on the government’s dime.
The most exclusive club in the world has a similarly exclusive price tag – nearly $3.7 million, according to a new report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. That’s how much the federal government spent last year on the four living ex-presidents and one presidential widow.
Topping the list in 2012 was George W. Bush, who got just over $1.3 million last year.
Under the Former Presidents Act, previous inhabitants of the Oval Office are given an annual pension equivalent to a Cabinet secretary’s salary – about $200,000 last year, plus $96,000 a year for a small office staff. Taxpayers also pick up the tab for other items like staff benefits, travel, office space and postage.
The $3.7 million taxpayers shelled out in 2012 is about $200,000 less than in 2011, and the sum in 2010 was even higher. It’s a drop in the bucket compared with the trillions the federal government spends each year.
Still, with ex-presidents able to command eye-popping sums for books, speaking engagements and the like in their post-White House years, the report raises questions about whether the U.S. should provide such generous subsidies at a time when spending cuts and the deficit are forcing lawmakers and federal agencies to seek ways to cut back.
Report: George W. Bush has most expenses among former presidents for 2012
By Josh Lederman, Published: March 25
The costliest former president? George W. Bush, who clocked in last year at just more than $1.3 million.
The $3.7 million taxpayers shelled out in 2012 is about $200,000 less than in 2011. All of it is a drop in the bucket compared with the trillions the federal government spends each year.
Still, former presidents are able to command eye-popping sums for books, speaking engagements and the like in their post-White House years, and the report comes at a time when spending cuts and the deficit are forcing lawmakers and federal agencies to cut back.
Under the Former Presidents Act, previous inhabitants of the Oval Office are given a $200,000 annual pension — the equivalent to a Cabinet secretary’s salary — plus $96,000 a year for a small office staff. The government also picks up the tab for costs such as travel, office space and postage.
Departing presidents get additional help in the first years after they leave office, one reason Bush’s costs were higher than those of other living former presidents. The most recent president to leave the White House, Bush was granted almost $400,000 for 8,000 square feet of office space in Dallas, plus $85,000 in telephone costs. Another $60,000 went to travel costs.
Expensive massages, top shelf vodka and five-star hotels: First Lady accused of spending $10m in public money on her vacations
By Daily Mail Reporter
Created 3:33 PM on 24th August 2011
The Obamas’ summer break on Martha’s Vineyard has already been branded a PR disaster after the couple arrived four hours apart on separate government jets.
But according to new reports, this is the least of their extravagances.
White House sources today claimed that the First Lady has spent $10million of U.S. taxpayers’ money on vacations alone in the past year.
Expensive taste: Michelle Obama, pictured yesterday in Massachusetts, has been accused of spending $10m of public money on vacations
Branding her ‘disgusting’ and ‘a vacation junkie’, they say the 47-year-old mother-of-two has been indulging in five-star hotels, where she splashes out on expensive massages and alcohol.
- Revealed: How Obama goes hobnobbing with friends and donors while on Martha’s Vineyard family holiday
- Michelle Obama shows up her husband in tiny purple bike shorts as the President lags behind in jeans
- Nothing like a world of porn kings and gangsters to take your mind off things… Obama gets stuck into his holiday reading amidst global turmoil
The ‘top source’ told the National Enquirer: ‘It’s disgusting. Michelle is taking advantage of her privileged position while the most hardworking Americans can barely afford a week or two off work.
‘When it’s all added up, she’s spent more than $10million in taxpayers’ money on her vacations.’
His and her jets: The President and his wife, who are spending nine days on Martha’s Vineyard, have come under fire for travelling on separate planes
The First Lady is believed to have taken 42 days of holiday in the past year, including a $375,000 break in Spain and a four-day ski trip to Vail, Colorado, where she spent $2,000 a night on a suite at the Sebastian hotel.
And the first family’s nine-day stay in Martha’s Vineyard is also proving costly, with rental of the Blue Heron Farm property alone costing an estimated $50,000 a week.
The source continued: ‘Michelle also enjoys drinking expensive booze during her trips. She favours martinis with top-shelf vodka and has a taste for rich sparking wines.
‘The vacations are totally Michelle’s idea. She’s like a junkie. She can’t schedule enough getaways, and she lives from one to the next – all the while sticking it to hardworking Americans.’
Traveling in style: Mrs Obama during her $375,000 trip to Spain last year
Spending is at record levels and is still growing, threatening economic freedom.
Cut Spending, Fix the Debt, and Restore Prosperity*******************************************************************************************************************************
The two parties of Big Government
By Rebekah Rast — Would the author of the New Deal be pleased with the state of Social Security 80 years later? Did President Johnson, when approving of the Medicare amendment in 1965, know of the volatility of such a program and the government dependency it would create?
While Presidents Franklin D. Roosevelt and Johnson did what they thought best for the nation at the time, they must have known that to inject even a little government spending into peoples’ personal lives would only lead to more spending and a new kind of government dependency.
And that is exactly what has happened. Almost 60 percent of all federal spending is now dedicated to so-called “mandatory” spending, which includes entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security. In 1960, entitlement payments accounted for well under a third of the federal government’s total outlays, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Because this government largesse can no longer be afforded, entitlement programs are in trouble. Projections have shown that if not dealt with Medicare as we know it might not be around in the next decade, with the trust fund set to run out in 2024.
Both sides of the political aisle see fit to fund a federal health insurance program for America’s seniors, and both sides champion a need for some kind of reform to save it.
Taxpayers subsidize big banks handing out $83 bln annually
Published on Mar 25, 2013
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) grilled Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke about the risks of having banks that are too big to fail on Tuesday. According to a recent Bloomberg study, some of the biggest banks are receiving $83 billion in subsidies each year. Bernanke appeared before the Senate Banking Committee and was forced to answer whether or not these financial institutions should be forced to reimburse taxpayers for the bailouts. Anthony Randazzo, director of economic research with the Reason Foundation, breaks down the numbers.
- Taxpayers Foot $3.7M Bill for Ex-Presidents’ Phones, Postage, Travel and More (washington.cbslocal.com)
- Ex-Presidents cost American taxpayers at least $3.7 million a year (capitolhillblue.com)
- How much do we pay for ex-presidents? (abcactionnews.com)
- Taxpayers shell out nearly $3.7M for ex-presidents (ktvb.com)
Personal information stolen from several email accounts belonging to people close to the Bush family reveals the nation’s 43rd president has developed an affinity for painting himself bathing, of all things.
Photos included in an information dump turned over to The Smoking Gun include President George H.W. Bush in the hospital, the elder Bush posing with President Bill Clinton, a family photo of former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and even President George W. Bush posing with a cardboard cutout of himself wearing a mustache and beret.
A hacker going by the name “Guccifer” claimed the stolen messages include addresses, phone numbers and email addresses that go directly to both former presidents and their families, along with a security code for a gate outside the younger Bush’s home in Dallas.
Read Full Article Here
- George W. Bush Family Emails and Photos Exposed in Hack (redalertpolitics.com)
- Secret Service investigating hacking of Bush emails (radionz.co.nz)
- George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush emails hack (guardianlv.com)
- FOCUS | George W. Bush’s Email Account Hacked (readersupportednews.org)
- George W. Bush Family Emails and Photos Exposed in Hack (mashable.com)
- Hacker gains access to Bush family emails, photos (sfgate.com)
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com
(NaturalNews) With huge fanfare and an overdose of propaganda, the U.S. government is announcing it’s going to reform school lunches and vending machines to eliminate junk beverages like sodas. “Under new rules the Department of Agriculture proposed Friday, school vending machines would start selling water, lower-calorie sports drinks, diet sodas and baked chips instead,” reports the Washington Post.
Except, here’s the problem: We heard this same hoax six years ago when Bill Clinton was widely applauded for achieving the very same “reform” back then.
Forbes.com practically drooled over the “leadership” of Clinton when it announced, in 2006:
“Under the agreement, the companies have agreed to sell only water, unsweetened juice and low-fat milk to elementary and middle schools while high schools would be allowed diet drinks, unsweetened teas, flavored water, and low-calorie sports drinks.”
Er, hold on a sec. Why is the USDA saying it’s going to ban sugary sodas in 2013 when Forbes.com reported that Bill Clinton already solved the problem in 2006?
Because it’s all a hoax.
- USDA school lunch reform rules are a complete hoax: here’s the proof (secretsofthefed.com)
- USDA school lunch reform rules are a complete hoax – Here’s the proof: (sgtreport.com)
- New Rules Aim to Get Rid of Junk Foods in Schools (abcnews.go.com)
- Healthier schools: Goodbye candy and greasy snacks (cnsnews.com)
- Healthy Schools: Goodbye Candy and Greasy Snacks (kcrg.com)
- Healthy Schools: Goodbye Candy and Greasy Snacks (cnsnews.com)
- Obama admin. proposes sweeping new rules on what children can eat in schools (foxnews.com)
- USDA sets new limitations on snacks sold in school vending machines (foxnews.com)
- Chips, Sodas Out, Healthier Fare In With New School Snack Rules (news.health.com)
- Rules would make school snacks healthier (newsobserver.com)
Information Clearing House
Fri, 25 Jan 2013 11:04 CST
The following is an excerpt from A Secret History of Torture (Counterpoint Press, 2012)
Two days after the 9/11 attacks, during a meeting of Bush’s closest advisers, Cofer Black declared the country’s enemies must be left with ‘flies walking across their eyeballs’. It was an image of death so striking that Black became known among the President’s inner circle as ‘the flies on the eyeballs guy’. Unlike its allies – the UK, France, Spain and Israel – the US had little experience of serious terrorist attacks on its own territory, nor any understanding of the need for a patient response. Bush was impressed by Black. Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, could see that the President wanted to kill somebody. The problem, as successive attorneys general had warned one president after another, was that they did not enjoy unfettered powers of life and death over the nation’s enemies. The CIA had been banned from carrying out assassinations since 1976.
The President turned to his Department of Defense and found that it had no cogent, off-the-shelf plan for responding to an attack of this nature on the United States. The CIA, on the other hand, did have something in its arsenal: it had the rendition program.
Since 1987, the CIA had been quietly apprehending terrorists and ‘rendering’ them to the US for prosecution, without any regard for lawful extradition processes. In 1995, President Bill Clinton – apparently with the full encouragement of his vice-president, Al Gore – agreed that a number of terrorists could be taken to a third country, including countries known to use torture, a process that would come to be known as extraordinary rendition.
Mike Scheuer, the CIA officer who started that programme, faced few objections from Clinton’s national security advisers when he began taking prisoners to Egypt, where they could be interrogated under torture. ‘They just didn’t want to know what we were doing,’ he says.
Before 9/11, however, there were limits. In 1998, for example, the CIA had drawn up a plan to kidnap Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan and take him to Egypt. A shipping container was installed inside a Hercules aircraft and inside that was bolted a dentist’s chair fitted with restraints. The CIA were all ready to go when, at the last moment, the FBI persuaded Clinton’s attorney general, Janet Reno, that bin Laden’s inevitable death at the hands of the Egyptians would be an act of murder and that US officials would be responsible. Reno vetoed the plan.
By 13 September, with a still-unknown number of Americans dead and the President wanting action, all such legal squeamishness had vanished. President Bush and Dick Cheney both believed al-Qaida had succeeded because government lawyers had been expecting the CIA to do its job with one hand tied behind its back. Bush said as much to his attorney general, John Ashcroft, when he warned him: ‘Don’t ever let this happen again.’ So when the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, went to brief the President a few days after 9/11 and began to talk of the need to gather evidence for future prosecutions, he was promptly silenced by Ashcroft. Prosecutions were beside the point, Ashcroft said. All that mattered was stopping another attack.
That night, Cofer Black locked himself away at his office at Langley and within five days had drawn up plans for the CIA’s response. It would entail a vast expansion of the rendition programme. Hundreds of al-Qaida suspects would be tracked down and abducted from their homes and hiding places in eighty different countries. The agency would decide who was to be killed and who was to be kept alive in a network of secret prisons, outside the US, where they would be systematically tormented until every one of their secrets had been delivered up. The United States had been blindsided by al-Qaida on 9/11 and that situation would not be permitted to occur a second time.
Black’s plan was presented to the President and his war cabinet in a series of meetings during the days after the attacks. On Monday 17 September, Bush signed off the paperwork: with a stroke of his pen the CIA was granted the power of life and death over al-Qaida suspects and could arrange for men to be detained and tortured indefinitely. All this, Bush later said, was to remain invisible.
A few hours afterwards there was a brief glimpse of the manner in which the United States would disregard the restraints of international law when responding to the attacks. Speaking at a press conference, Bush said: ‘There’s an old poster out West that says, “Wanted: Dead or Alive.”‘ The President then checked himself before saying that those responsible for the murderous attacks should be brought to justice.
- How America Became a Global Kidnapper and Torturer (alternet.org)
- Shocking Story of How the US Ignored International Law to Become to World’s Kidnapper and Torturer (alternet.org)
- How the U.S. ignored International Law to become world’s kidnapper and torturer (sott.net)
- How Britain Enthusiastically Teamed Up with Bush’s Horrific Torture and Rendition Agenda (alternet.org)
(CNSNews.com) – During Barack Obama’s first term as president of the United States, the debt of the federal government increased by $5.8 trillion, which exceeds the combined debt accumulated under all presidents from George Washington through Bill Clinton.
The new federal debt accumulated in Obama’s first term equaled approximately $50,521 for each of household in the country.
On Jan. 20, 2009, when Obama was first inaugurated, the total debt of the federal government was $10,626,877,048,913.08, according to the U.S. Treasury. As of the close of business on Jan. 17, the last day reported by the Treasury before Obama’s second inauguration, the total debt of the federal government was $16,432,631,489,854.70.
Thus, from Obama’s first inauguration to his second, the federal government’s debt grew by $5,805,754,440,941.62.
- Obama increased debt-per-household by $50,521 in first term (utsandiego.com)
- First Term: Obama Increased Debt $50,521 Per Household; More Than First 42 Presidents in 53 Terms Combined (ncrenegade.com)
- $5.8T: Obama Increased Debt $50,521 Per Household in First Term; More Than First 42 Presidents in 53 Terms Combined (blacklistednews.com)
- Obama’s Now Borrowed More Than All Presidents from Washington to W (cnsnews.com)
- Aims to hit benchmark set by Lincoln… (telegraph.co.uk)