-Caveat Lector-
Begin forwarded message:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: July 7, 2007 1:29:29 PM PDT
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: (2) Don't Point Fingers, You Might Poke [Israel's] Eye Out
Saturday, July 07, 2007
Getting Rich
http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2007/07/getting-rich.html
Eleanor Clift (accessed by way of Josh Marshall) has offered the
wisest "take" on Libby. Remember when we all expected Scooter to
sing a song implicating Cheney and/or Rove? Instead, his lawyers
barely put up a defense. Libby must have known all along that he
would never do one day behind bars.
The President's commutation of Scooter Libby's sentence has caused
W's defenders to dredge up Bill Clinton's pardon of fugitive
financier Marc Rich. We have already taken one retrospective look
at the Rich affair (scroll down or go here), and we have noted a
delicious irony: Clinton's thinking was swayed, in part, by Rich's
lawyer -- Scooter Libby.
Sofla, one of our readers, offered a comment that deserves wider
attention, hence this post. She places the Rich affair in context
-- and that context has a name: Rudolph Giuliani.
Two other companies, large oil concerns with names you know, were
charged with doing the same thing as Marc Rich's company did. Their
offenses were treated as technical tax code violations, and
therefore civil matters, not crimes at all; they paid the back
taxes and some fines, and that was it.
In the case of Marc Rich, however, a politically ambitious NY/
southern district US Attorney decided he would invent a novel
application of the RICO laws in a civil matter as had never been
done before, and which results devolved into such a travesty of
justice that now DOJ guidelines for prosecutors forbid them from
similarly pursuing civil RICO charges against anybody. (That US
Attorney? One Rudy Giuliani, and this provides an excellent window
into his bullying character and why he should never be allowed near
the Oval Office).
Rich did not 'flee' the country as a fugitive from indictment-- he
maintained a residence and business HQ in Switzerland at all times,
and left the country to return there as per his normal travel
patterns before any indictments were returned. (Note, this was a
civil matter involving no criminal indictments at all for the other
two companies). Rich wasn't additionally charged with being a
fugitive, because the terms of that charge didn't apply to his
situation because it was as described above, despite how these
terms are loosely thrown around to describe what he did.
The Marc Rich case went through all the normal procedural hurdles
for presidential pardons, including review by the special DOJ
pardon section, seeking the comments pro or con of the original
prosecutor, and etc. The complete 'regular order' of things was
honored, including, most importantly perhaps, that the aggrieved
party actually submit a pardon request, but all the rest of it as
well. Additionally, Marc Rich's company PAID IN FULL ALL THE TAXES
OWED, AND THE FINES, amounting to several hundred million dollars.
(To be sure, normally, such a petitioner could not remain 'at
large,' sought by authorities, and must instead have surrendered
himself to the authorities. And normally, the president would
require a positive recommendation from the DOJ pardon officer and
whatever other panels he consulted, and in Rich's case, those
parties recommended no pardon. But the situation was unique,
unprecedented, and the DOJ and the prosecutor were loathe to admit
they'd badly abused their authority in the first place to get these
indictments, although that was exactly what they had done.)
But the Libby case featured no such formalities whatsoever. Libby
didn't apply for any presidential relief. He hadn't begun serving
his time, nor cease pursuing his appeals. He didn't repent or
express remorse. He didn't pledge on-going cooperation with the
prosecutor, still less deliver on such a proffer. And Bush didn't
go through ANY DOJ process, ask ANY official opinion of anyone --
he simply trashed the system for this, and rashly substituted his
opinion for any due process as it exists in DOJ guidelines.
In assuring that Libby served less time than the original time
Paris Hilton did before she was prematurely released, Bush appears
to be saying that ANY JAIL TIME more than ZERO was excessive, and
his slap-dash lightening quick 'review' of this matter has more the
appearance of a heavy-handed obstruction of justice, accessory
after the fact kind of thing, rather than a righting of any injustice.
I would add this.
It is well known that Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak begged Bill
Clinton to pardon Rich. It is also well-known that Rich forged ties
with Iran's leader, the Ayatollah Khomeini, at a time when Khomeini
was considered by America to be public enemy number one. Rich's
Iran dealings were at the heart of his little tax problem.
Rich is fiercely pro-Israel. Khomeini was fiercely anti-Israel. So
why did Rich form the business arrangements with Iran that have
caused him so much trouble?
Let's take another look at the "October Surprise" theory of the
1980 election -- the theory that, at the time of the Iranian
hostage crisis, the Reagan campaign struck up a secret deal with
Khomeini's government to keep the hostages captive until Jimmy
Carter left office.
One noted proponent of this thesis is Gary Sick, former Carter
adviser and career officer in Naval Intelligence. This is from a
1991 statement by Sick:
What this evidence shows is a consistent pattern of secret contacts
with Iran by the Reagan-Bush campaign. The contacts began early in
1980, from about the moment that William Casey became the campaign
manager for Mr. Reagan. They continued through the summer of that
year in Madrid, where the first outline of a deal was reportedly
proposed and accepted and where Israeli participation was first
introduced. The terms of the bargain were reportedly made final in
the second half of October in Paris. The hostages were released
minutes after President Reagan had taken the oath of office, and
arms began to flow to Iran from Israel, with U.S. government
acquiescence, almost immediately thereafter...
Third, there is a considerable body of evidence that military
equipment began to flow in substantial quantities from Israel to
Iran almost immediately after the Reagan inauguration and that
these shipments were known to, and approved, by the new
administration.
A far more complete account is here:
In early 1980, Israel went to the administration, offering to
broker an unusual deal: The Iranians would free the hostages in
exchange for desperately needed weapons. Israel's proposal was
based on several explosive factors that lurked beneath the surface
of the crisis, largely unseen by the American people. Israel's OIL
came from IRAN. Israeli arms sales to Iran were crucial to its
economy. And militarily, Iran was a counterweight to Israel's
feared enemy, Iraq's Saddam Hussein.
(Emphasis added.) The afore-cited piece goes on to detail the many
pieces of evidence linking Israel to secret arms sales to Iran.
(Scroll down to the section titled "Israel and Arms.")
What did Israel get from the deal? Obviously, it got political
leverage -- the impolite phrase would be "blackmail material" -- on
the incoming Reagan administration. More importantly, Israel
received large amounts of a certain black and viscous substance.
Iran played an important role in the Israeli economy during the
days of the [CIA-sponsored] Shah, and Israel wanted to maintain a
relationship even after the revolution. The two countries,
officially enemies, did business throughout the hostage crisis,
especially after the Iran-Iraq war made Iran desperate for military
parts. That war began in September of 1980, although the two
countries had been snarling at each other for some time.
Marc Rich played a key role in brokering these deals, arranging for
millions of barrels of Iranian oil to reach Israel. Gordon Thomas
(a source I would use with some caution) claims that Rich was a
Mossad "sayyan," or helper. His right-hand man, Avner Azulay, is
Mossad. See here:
...Vincent Cannistraro, a former spook and a Middle East
expert...said the Mossad used Rich as a "conduit for financial
transfers" and to pass messages to Iran when necessary. He is a
very wealthy man, so he is not on the payroll per se. He was a very
close friend of the Israeli government and has been cooperating
with Israeli intelligence since the early 1980s.
I believe that the cooperation began a bit earlier than that.
Khomeini, of course, adopted a fiercely anti-Israel stance in
public, just as the Reagan administration adopted a fiercely anti-
Iran stance in public. Those strange bedfellows had to keep their
affair very hush-hush.
And hush-hush it was -- until the Iran-contra scandal broke open.
See what's free at AOL.com.
www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substanceânot soap-boxingâplease! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'âwith its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright fraudsâis used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/ctrl@listserv.aol.com/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
