1. Anonymous says:

    I know this isn’t relevant to your story, but Jason Leopold is reporting that John Hadley has been cooperating with Fitzgerald for a long time – that he’s the senior official from the Iraq Strategy Group who ratted out Libby and Rove.

    You’re my go-to site for Plame news. What’s up? Is this old news that I never saw, or news that’s just not credible? Or is an interesting revelation? He says he has four current and former White House officials as sources.


  2. Anonymous says:

    Certainly, we have seen our national interest repeatedly get hijacked of late. Who’s to say whether the reasons aren’t criminal at the heart of much of this?

    Isn’t that what http://www.justacitizen.com/ar…..o_Kean.pdf†rel=â€nofollowâ€>Sibel Edmonds has been trying to tell us?

  3. Anonymous says:

    Super- (or Slightly) empowered individuals must pilot most of today’s world economies.

    Is US politics a micro-model of world politics? Is Ralph Reed a role model, test dummy, for al-Sadr?

    Your comments reminded me of Putin inveiling against the NGOs, BTW. It would be good if NGOs were be a positive force.

    Have the citizens ever controlled or understood foreign policy? Are larger players really seizing control of foreign policy or is more of the populace climbing the learning curve, and becoming enlightened?

  4. Anonymous says:

    OT — Help. I was reading FDL and I hit refresh and suddenly a new post by Armando went up and all comments are closed. they were going to try to switch to WordPress — guess it did not go very well. Anyone here????

  5. Anonymous says:

    mamayaga – you are right – sibel has been saying that.

    this too:
    those trafficking in licit goods are just as likely to traffic in illicit goods. They will often use the same networks and always the same skills.
    (or more precisely, the other way around.)

  6. Anonymous says:

    lukery and maymayaga:


    And while he doesn’t say as much, he’s effectively saying that there’s a thin line between the Enrons of the world and the Al Qaedas.

    Not a huge revelation, but coming from a big name in foreign affairs wonkery, worth noting.

    For those more interested in formal foreign affairs, wonkery, btw, he pretty much calls all available schools out there (realist and idealist) unworkable to face this threat.

  7. Anonymous says:

    there’s a thin line between the Enrons of the world and the Al Qaedas.

    true – but let’s also not forget that ’the enrons’ are also replicated all over the bush egadministration – including the rudy/buckham/USFN model, or norquist/ATR, or any other example of ’grassroots’ cutouts and/or outright fraud. we don’t need to step into weird time warps (enron) or ideology warps (osama) for supra-national analogies. we all see the exact same usurpation every day (even in the traditional media) – hidden in plain view. today.

    look at mccain on timmeh on the weekend: ’i wont ever agree to tax raises. i voted against the tax cuts. they originally purported to be ’temporary’, and now i cant vote against them, cos that would be a tax hike.’ ken skilling would be proud – but he’d at least have the sense to try to hide such nonsense off-book.

    i’m getting a bit off-track – but when we talk about the thin line between enron (off-book financing) and alqaeda (arms/drug trafficking) – the first thing that comes to mind is iran-contra. thank goodness that is all behind us (/snark)

  8. Anonymous says:

    For a first hand account of this sort of thing, I recommend â€Profits of War†by Ari Ben-Menashe, Allen & Unwin 1992.

  9. Anonymous says:


    Where is all the money from the Halliburton and Parsons graft going? Where did all the Abramoff non-profit money go? One of the reasons I included the private security number (and thanks for the rec, Griffon, yes I do plan to get around to that) is because it really demonstrates the scale of the mony being spent. YOu can wage several wars with that kind ofmoney.

  10. Anonymous says:

    Thanks for the book recommendation, and thanks also for not linking to Amazon, as so many bloggers reflexively do, given their history of contributing to the GOP.

    So incomes are stagnating not just because of skimming by corporate management, but because they all have to pay so highly for security in the dog-eat-dog world they have created. Maybe you are right about the return to feudalsm.

  11. Anonymous says:

    EW – i totally agree that there’s enough money slushing around to finance wars. my point (badly expressed) was that we have the exact same illicit, decentralized, non-state networks operating right under our noses. As you suggest, Halliburton (and others) are perhaps better examples than the more nebulous ’alqaeda’.

    (apologies if i left the italics tag open earlier)

  12. Anonymous says:

    Great post, as per usual. I just wanted to point out â€short sellers†as a an example of â€private†resources that provide an infitesimally small watch-dog on the SEC and Justice. IIRC it was the shorts who first spotted the obvious illegality at Enron and Tyco and profited from it. The shorts are not always right, but they have the potential to wake up the sleepier analysts in the markets, the SEC (currently run by a Bush crownie, Chris Cox), and Justice.

  13. Anonymous says:

    O.K. You made me do it. I bought the book to read this summer. Thanks for the very interesting discussion of it.

  14. Anonymous says:

    Look, im not trying to have a â€conspiracy discussion†(tho I dont shy away from it) but isnt this all in line with many different longstanding (and ostensibly-provable) theories that connect elements in our government with illicit criminal behavior? For example BCCI, Iran Contra and other CIA activity when exposed always seems to be connected with (and funded by) the illegal drug trade. How far of a stretch is this kind of conversation to certain members of the Bush Admin (or Cheney-Halliburton-Carlyle-Military/Industrio/Complex-whatever) being involved in 9/11 to further a trillion dollar criminal empire built on oil and defense expenditures and again, the drug trade (Afghanistan is producing record amounts now that the taliban has been dispatched). Im not trying to be glib, and while Im painting a very broad picture, isnt all this related to the above topic? And if we correctly accept criminal entreprise on a corporate/global/multibillion dollar scale hijacking governments, isnt it possible to get state sponsored domestic terrorism?

    there’s a thin line between the Enrons of the world and the Al Qaedas

  15. Anonymous says:

    chris deliso has a new article reviewing a collection of essays called â€Networks, Terrorism, and Global Insurgency†– he concludes:
    â€In the end, the business of terrorism and war is a symbiotic one, bringing together an unlikely cast of opposing characters, from nationalist militants to Mafia clans, from soldiers of strong states to the private mercenaries who cooperate with both them and, sometimes, local warlords and crime bosses. As Networks, Terrorism, and Global Insurgency abundantly demonstrates, war has never been stranger than it is today.â€
    no surprises there – but somewhat interesting

  16. Anonymous says:

    Of course, a close parallel from History is the opium trade in China financed by the English aristocracy and then enforced through military intervention from the Royal Navy on their behalf. It’s where the term â€Gunboat Diplomacy†comes from.