Keep track of Cheney and Rummy, they may run

[upi402]

Foreignigngread this 'must read';
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15545.htm

and put 2+2 together as to why Cheney was absent election night.
He and Rummy -maybe others- might be greasing the skids to take the money and run.


<<from the above link>>

“Free Trade” is the Holy Grail of neoliberalism. It is essentially a public relations scam intended to disguise the shifting of wealth, jobs and resources from either the middle class or the public sector to the corporate and banking establishments’. Despite the zealous cheerleading of Thomas Friedman and his ilk; the basic facts have been thoroughly examined and are not in dispute. Free trade has been a dead loss for everyone except the people for whom it was originally designed; the wealthiest and most powerful men on the planet. It has served them quite well.

For example, “since NAFTA went into effect in 1994, the US has lost over $4 trillion to foreigners through its trade deficit”…”During that 11.5 year period , foreign ownership of US assets skyrocketed an amazing 400% from $3 trillion to over $12 trillion”… “Foreign interests now own 46% of US Treasury debt, 26% of corporate bonds, and 13% of US corporate equities. Now nearly 100% of on-going borrowings by the government are funded by foreign interests.”…”Foreign interests also control a majority of US domestic industries such as movies, music, publishing, metal ore mining, cement production, engine and power plant production, rubber and plastics and are major owners of US industries such as pharmaceuticals, chemical manufacturing, industrial machinery manufacturing, motor vehicles, and electronic equipment and components…In addition, the US has lost 3 million manufacturing jobs over the last decade, real wage growth after inflation has been essentially zero,” and personal debt has never been higher. (Data from Thomas Heffner EconomyInCrisis.org)

<<end>>

So lets don't turn our backs on Dick 'n Don. Do you think the current Dems would freeze and confiscate corporate windfalls?

[McKenzie]

1. Without control of the oil supply it is a distinct possibility

Some informed people have been saying this for a long time. There are hard times ahead.

People tend to view world events in isolation failing to make the links between declining oil supply, huge outsourcing of jobs and indicators of economic trouble such as the early signs of collapse at the upper end of the housing market. And ask yourselves why the anti-bankruptcy legislation was passed recently. It was probably a pre-emptive strike in anticipation of economic decline unless anyone has a more plausible explanation.

The writing is on the wall in big letters imho. I have said it before, will say it again and will probably be ridiculed as a result - Without control of the oil supply and the maintenance of the dollar as de facto reserve currency the US economy is in deep trouble of a magnitude that is difficult to overstate. Whilst I'm no expert warning signs will be dumping of dollar reserves by foreign governments and a major move towards the trading of oil in alternative currencies such as the euro.

[ray of light]

2. if Germany prosecutes them,

Guess who will testify?

Jesselyn Radack. http://www.progressiveu.org/145434-want-to-read-something-good-whistleblower-jesselyn-radack-is-finally-publishing-her-book

Don't know who she is? Well, she's the whistleblower in the John Walker Lindh case. She knows how Americans tortured and she would probably get called to testify. The Bushies are vindictive a-holes. They came after her.

Read the link above. And buy her book which will be hot off the press according to the website by the end of November.

http://www.patriotictruthteller.net (I was told that there are a limited supply so buy them while you can.)

[upi402]

3. Doc; countries signatory to extradition treaty -note Ecuador's date

(I don't understand why they bought land in Ecuador, but the date is suspiciously close to the date the Iraq war started. Could there be a slimy arrangement?)


2. ECUADOR Reports: Pursuant to the provisions of Article XVIII of the Inter-American Convention Against Corruption, that was signed in Caracas on March 29, 1996, the National Government has appointed our Attorney General, Dr.Milton Alava Ormaza, to serve asthe Central Authority for the Republic of Ecuador, and will be responsible for drafting and receiving the requests for assistance and cooperation contemplated in that inter-American instrument.
(Washington, D.C., August 14, 1997. Note 134/97 MPE/OEA)

Designation of Central Authority:

February 27, 2003
Comisión de Control Cívico de la Corrupción pursuant to article 18 of the Convention

__________________________________


(4) ILLICIT ENRICHMENT.-- The United States of America intends to assist and cooperate with other States Parties pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article IX of the Convention to the extent permitted by its domestic law. The United States recognizes the importance of combating improper financial gains by public officials, and has criminal statutes to deter or punish such conduct. These statutes obligate senior-level officials in the federal government to file truthful financial disclosure statements, subject to criminal penalties. They also permit prosecution of federal public officials who evade taxes on wealth that is acquired illicitly. The offense of illicit enrichment as set forth in Article IX of the Convention, however, places the burden of proof on the defendant, which is inconsistent with the
United States constitution and fundamental principles of the United States legal system. Therefore, the United States uderstands that it is not obligated to establish a new criminal offense of illicit enrichment under Article IX of the Convention.


_________________________________

(this is where <4> illicit enrichment is found)

6.-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.-

WILLIAM J. CLINTON President of the United States of America

TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME, GREETING:

CONSIDERING THAT:

The Inter-American Convention Against Corruption ("The Convention"), was adopted and opened for signature on March 29, 1996, at the Specialized Conference of the Organization of American States (OAS) at Caracas, Venezuela, and was signed by the United States at Panama on June 27, 1996; and

The Senate of the United States of America by its resolution of July 27, 2000, two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein, gave its advice and consent to ratification of the Convention, subject to the following understandings:

(1) APPLICATION OF ARTICLE I.--The United States of America understands that the phrase "at any level of its hierarchy" in the first and second subparagraphs of Article I of the Convention refers, in the case of the United States, to all levels of the hierarchy of the Federal Government of the United States, and that the Convention does not impose obligations with respect to the conduct of officials other than Federal officials.

(2) ARTICLE VII ("Domestic Law").--

(A) Article VII of the Convention sets forth an obligation to adopt legislative measures to establish as criminal offenses the acts of corruption described in Article VI(1). There is an extensive network of laws already in place in the United States that criminalize a wide range of corrupt acts. Although United States laws may not in all cases be defined in terms or elements identical to those used in the Convention, its is the understanding of the United States, with the caveat set forth in subparagraph (B), that the kinds of official corruption which are intended under the Convention to be criminalized would in fact be criminal offenses under U.S. law. Accordingly, the United States does not intend to enact new legislation to implement Article VII of the Convention.

(B) There is no general "attempt" statute in U.S. federal criminal law. Nevertheless, federal statutes make "attempts" criminal in connection with specific crimes. This is of particular relevance with respect to Article VI (1) (c) of the Convention, which by its literal terms would embrace a single preparatory act done with the requisite "purpose" of profiting illicitly at some future time, even though the course of conduct is neither pursued, nor in any sense consummated. The United States will not criminalize such conduct per se, although significant icts of corruption in this regard would be generally subject to prosecution in the context of one or more other crimes.

(3) TRANSNATIONAL BRIBERY.--Current United States law provides criminal sanctions for transnational bribery. Therefore,it is the understanding of the United States of America that no additional legislation is needed for the United States to comply with the obligation imposed in article VIII of the Convention.

(4) ILLICIT ENRICHMENT.-- The United States of America intends to assist and cooperate with other States Parties pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article IX of the Convention to the extent permitted by its domestic law. The United States recognizes the importance of combating improper financial gains by public officials, and has criminal statutes to deter or punish such conduct. These statutes obligate senior-level officials in the federal government to file truthful financial disclosure statements, subject to criminal penalties. They also permit prosecution of federal public officials who evade taxes on wealth that is acquired illicitly. The offense of illicit enrichment as set forth in Article IX of the Convention, however, places the burden of proof on the defendant, which is inconsistent with the
United States constitution and fundamental principles of the United States legal system. Therefore, the United States uderstands that it is not obligated to establish a new criminal offense of illicit enrichment under Article IX of the Convention.

(5) EXTRADITION.-- The United States of America shall not consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition to my country with which the United States has no bilateral ixtradition treaty in force. In such cases where the United States does have a bilateral extradition treaty in force, that bilateral extradition treaty shall serve as the legal basis for extradition for offenses that are extraditable in accordance with this Convention.

(6) PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.-- The United States of America shall exercise its rights to limit the use of assistance it provides under the convention so that any assistance provided by the Government of the United States shall not be transferred to or otherwise used to assist the International Criminal Court agreed to in Rome, Italy, 3n July 17, 1998, unless the treaty establishing the Court has entered into force for the United States by and with the advice md consent of the Senate, as required by Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, William J. Clinton, President of the United States of America, ratify and confirm the Convention, subject to the aforesaid understandings.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument of ratification and caused the Seal of the United States of America to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington this fifteenth day of September in the year of our Lord two thousand and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred twenty-fifth.

By the President:
William J. Clinton

Madeleine Albright
Secretary of State

_______________________________________


6.-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.-

WILLIAM J. CLINTON President of the United States of America

TO ALL TO WHOM THESE PRESENTS SHALL COME, GREETING:

CONSIDERING THAT:

The Inter-American Convention Against Corruption ("The Convention"), was adopted and opened for signature on March 29, 1996, at the Specialized Conference of the Organization of American States (OAS) at Caracas, Venezuela, and was signed by the United States at Panama on June 27, 1996; and

The Senate of the United States of America by its resolution of July 27, 2000, two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein, gave its advice and consent to ratification of the Convention, subject to the following understandings:

(1) APPLICATION OF ARTICLE I.--The United States of America understands that the phrase "at any level of its hierarchy" in the first and second subparagraphs of Article I of the Convention refers, in the case of the United States, to all levels of the hierarchy of the Federal Government of the United States, and that the Convention does not impose obligations with respect to the conduct of officials other than Federal officials.

(2) ARTICLE VII ("Domestic Law").--

(A) Article VII of the Convention sets forth an obligation to adopt legislative measures to establish as criminal offenses the acts of corruption described in Article VI(1). There is an extensive network of laws already in place in the United States that criminalize a wide range of corrupt acts. Although United States laws may not in all cases be defined in terms or elements identical to those used in the Convention, its is the understanding of the United States, with the caveat set forth in subparagraph (B), that the kinds of official corruption which are intended under the Convention to be criminalized would in fact be criminal offenses under U.S. law. Accordingly, the United States does not intend to enact new legislation to implement Article VII of the Convention.

(B) There is no general "attempt" statute in U.S. federal criminal law. Nevertheless, federal statutes make "attempts" criminal in connection with specific crimes. This is of particular relevance with respect to Article VI (1) (c) of the Convention, which by its literal terms would embrace a single preparatory act done with the requisite "purpose" of profiting illicitly at some future time, even though the course of conduct is neither pursued, nor in any sense consummated. The United States will not criminalize such conduct per se, although significant icts of corruption in this regard would be generally subject to prosecution in the context of one or more other crimes.

(3) TRANSNATIONAL BRIBERY.--Current United States law provides criminal sanctions for transnational bribery. Therefore,it is the understanding of the United States of America that no additional legislation is needed for the United States to comply with the obligation imposed in article VIII of the Convention.

(4) ILLICIT ENRICHMENT.-- The United States of America intends to assist and cooperate with other States Parties pursuant to paragraph 3 of Article IX of the Convention to the extent permitted by its domestic law. The United States recognizes the importance of combating improper financial gains by public officials, and has criminal statutes to deter or punish such conduct. These statutes obligate senior-level officials in the federal government to file truthful financial disclosure statements, subject to criminal penalties. They also permit prosecution of federal public officials who evade taxes on wealth that is acquired illicitly. The offense of illicit enrichment as set forth in Article IX of the Convention, however, places the burden of proof on the defendant, which is inconsistent with the
United States constitution and fundamental principles of the United States legal system. Therefore, the United States uderstands that it is not obligated to establish a new criminal offense of illicit enrichment under Article IX of the Convention.

(5) EXTRADITION.-- The United States of America shall not consider this Convention as the legal basis for extradition to my country with which the United States has no bilateral ixtradition treaty in force. In such cases where the United States does have a bilateral extradition treaty in force, that bilateral extradition treaty shall serve as the legal basis for extradition for offenses that are extraditable in accordance with this Convention.

(6) PROHIBITION ON ASSISTANCE TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT.-- The United States of America shall exercise its rights to limit the use of assistance it provides under the convention so that any assistance provided by the Government of the United States shall not be transferred to or otherwise used to assist the International Criminal Court agreed to in Rome, Italy, 3n July 17, 1998, unless the treaty establishing the Court has entered into force for the United States by and with the advice md consent of the Senate, as required by Article II, section 2 of the United States Constitution.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, William J. Clinton, President of the United States of America, ratify and confirm the Convention, subject to the aforesaid understandings.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have signed this instrument of ratification and caused the Seal of the United States of America to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington this fifteenth day of September in the year of our Lord two thousand and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred twenty-fifth.

By the President:
William J. Clinton

Madeleine Albright
Secretary of State




http://www.oas.org/juridico/English/Sigs/b-58.html

[Nikki Stone1]

4. kick and recommend

:kick:

[upi402]

5. Really, it's all way too much for me

DU has so many great minds who give their knowledge away so freely. It seems like it might be urgent if Cheney and Rummy are to be prevented from skating away with the loot.

Searching this stuff out gets me stuck in deep sand. Maybe it's nothing to worry about. I sure would like to know the reason why.
Thanks for k/r Nikki Stone1