The sleazy advocacy of a leading "liberal hawk"

Discussion in 'Politics' started by QUENTIN, Nov 14, 2009.

  1. QUENTIN
    Offline

    QUENTIN VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    964
    Thanks Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +203
    The sleazy advocacy of a leading "liberal hawk"

    Peter Galbraith's vast, undisclosed financial interests in the policies he spent years advocating as an "expert."

    The New York Times today details the unbelievably sleazy story of Peter Galbraith, one of the Democratic Party's leading so-called "liberal hawks" and a generally revered Wise Man of America's Foreign Policy Community. He was Ambassador to Croatia under the Clinton administration in the mid-1990s and, in March, 2009, the Obama administration (specifically, Richard Holbrooke, Galbraith's mentor) successfully pressured the U.N. to name Galbraith as the second-in-command in Afghanistan. The NYT does a good job today of adding some important details to the story, but it was actually uncovered by Norwegian investigative journalists and reported at length a month ago in pieces such as this one by Helena Cobban. In essence, this highly Serious man has corruptly concealed vast financial stakes in the very policies and positions he has spent years advocating while pretending to be an independent expert.

    Galbraith was one of the most vocal Democratic supporters of the attack on Iraq, having signed a March 19, 2003 public letter (.pdf) -- along with the standard cast of neocon war-lovers such as Bill Kristol, Max Boot, Danielle Pletka, and Robert Kagan -- stating that "we all join in supporting the military intervention in Iraq" and "it is now time to act to remove Saddam Hussein and his regime from power." As intended, that letter was then praised by outlets such as The Washington Post Editorial Page, gushing that "it is both significant and encouraging that a bipartisan group of influential foreign policy thinkers, veterans of both Democratic and Republican administrations, has signed on to a statement of policy on Iraq that makes sense on the war." Throughout 2002 and 2003, Galbraith appeared in numerous outlets -- including repeatedly on Fox News and with Bill O'Reilly -- presenting himself as a loyal Democrat firmly behind the invasion of Iraq. In 2002, he was an adviser to Paul Wolfowitz on Kurdistan.

    Rules of fair use prohibit posting entire pieces.

    ~Dude
     
  2. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    Nothing at all like Cheny and Haliburton, no bid contracts, etc?

    Or how big wheels from finiancial companies become finiancial leaders in our government?

    Yeah it sucks but that seems to be what politics has degraded to. And it is not a partisan thing either.
    Or how ex senators and reps get jobs after leaving office in the businesses they regulated and bought from with our money?
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2009
  3. potter 58
    Offline

    potter 58 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    996
    Thanks Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +57
    thumbes up US you called BS where Bs needed to be called
     
  4. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    It sucks bigtime, but to try and put partisan spin on it and ignore the rest is pathetically partisan.
     
  5. QUENTIN
    Offline

    QUENTIN VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    Messages:
    964
    Thanks Received:
    203
    Trophy Points:
    78
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +203
    Huh? I'm not putting a partisan spin on it. Jeez. Where do you see me saying it's any different than Cheney's even worse interests in the war?

    I criticize Bush and his invasion and occupations and illegal domestic activities and the community here condemns me as a partisan democrat. I condemn a leading war-proponent in the democratic party who has serious financial ties to every important policy he's had a hand in and the community here condemns me as a partisan republican.

    Can't you just think the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan are inhumane, illegal bullshit and oppose all the politicians who made them happen? I'm a progressive who doesn't like either national party. Not a partisan of anything. You folks need to discuss more ideas and policy and less about parties and sides.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2009
  6. PatekPhilippe
    Offline

    PatekPhilippe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2009
    Messages:
    8,171
    Thanks Received:
    1,200
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Sasebo Japan
    Ratings:
    +1,200
    Name on specific law broken by Bush....one single LAW!!!
     
  7. Chris
    Offline

    Chris Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2008
    Messages:
    23,154
    Thanks Received:
    1,958
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Location:
    Virginia
    Ratings:
    +2,089
    Rep. Conyers Issues Report Identifying 26 Laws Broken by Bush Admin | BuzzFlash.org

    •Deception of Congress and the American Public
    ◦Committing a Fraud Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 371)
    ◦Making False Statements Against the United States (18 U.S.C. § 1001)

    ◦War Powers Resolution (Public Law 93-148)
    ◦Misuse of Government Funds (31 U.S.C. § 1301)
    •Improper Detention, Torture, and Other Inhumane Treatment
    ◦Anti-Torture Statute (18 U.S.C. § 2340-40A)
    ◦The War Crimes Act (18 U.S.C. § 2441)
    ◦The Geneva Conventions and Hague Convention: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
    ◦United Nations Convention Against Torture, and Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment: International Laws Governing the Treatment of Detainees
    ◦Command Responsibility (for known illegal acts of subordinates in the military)
    ◦Detainment of Material Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 3144)
    •Retaliating against Witnesses and Other Individuals
    ◦Obstruction Congress (18 U.S.C. § 1505)
    ◦Whistleblower Protection (5 U.S.C. § 2302)
    ◦The Lloyd-LaFollette Act, or "anti-gag rule" (5 U.S.C. § 7211)
    ◦Retaliating against Witnesses (18 U.S.C. § 1513)
    •Leaking and other Misuse of Intelligence and other Government Information
    ◦Revealing Classified Information in Contravention of Federal Regulations (Executive Order 12958/Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement)
    ◦Statutory Prohibitions on Leaking Information (18 U.S.C. § 641, etc.)
    •Laws Governing Electronic Surveillance
    ◦Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (50 U.S.C. § 1801, et seq.)
    ◦National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. chapter 15)
    ◦Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. § 222)
    ◦Stored Communications Act of 1986 (18 U.S.C. § 2702)
    ◦Pen Registers or Trap and Trace Devices (18 U.S.C. § 3121)
    •Laws and Guidelines Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest (28 U.S.C. § 528, etc.)
     
  8. Darkwind
    Offline

    Darkwind Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2009
    Messages:
    14,151
    Thanks Received:
    2,593
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +4,265
    Conyers?


    LMFAO

    Yeah, thats impartial. And none of it proven.
     
  9. California Girl
    Offline

    California Girl BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2009
    Messages:
    50,337
    Thanks Received:
    8,960
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +8,965
    Cutting an pasting an article without commenting on it, is not - to an educated person - calling bullshit. It is copy and pasting an article.

    I call idiot. On this, I am correct - because you are one. See how that works? I read the OP, then I read your comment and, on the evidence provided by you, I suggest you're an idiot.
     
  10. JW Frogen
    Offline

    JW Frogen Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    Messages:
    6,165
    Thanks Received:
    1,167
    Trophy Points:
    153
    Ratings:
    +1,206


    Indeed President Bush was a stalwart defender of the Murphy’s Law.
     

Share This Page