[Reader-list] Cowboy Bush and the Carlyle Connection

[Dr. Alok Rai]

Shd be of interest - and worth further exploration:

The following links to articles about the Carlyle Group was put together by
a journalist in Oakland. This list has been published on a number of
journalism lists, including a list that is read by Karl Rove, Bush's
political advisor.

The Bush administration is war profiteering. Not only indirectly, such as
the 15 years of retroactive tax reimbursements to corporations (plus 100%
tax deductions for offshoring their profits,) but also directly: Bush's
father is employed by the Carlyle Group and Bush Jr., as his heir, will
inherit those profits.


Back in January when the administration was new, the Washington
Monthly noted (2nd last item) the Bush family business:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/tilting/2001/0104.tilting.html

The NYT ran a front-page photo of former President Bush with
Saudi King Fahd on a trip to Saudi Arabia as part of his work for
the Carlyle Group. The ice-breaking story by Leslie Wayne quoted
Charles Lewis: "In a really peculiar way, George W. Bush could,
some day, benefit financially from his own administration's
decisions, through his father's investments. The average American
doesn't know that and, to me, that's a jaw-dropper."
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/05/politics/05CARL.html

Judicial Watch commented that the senior Bush's association with
the Carlyle Group was a "conflict of interest (which) could cause
problems for America's foreign policy in Middle East and Asia."
Judicial Watch called on the President's father to resign.

Without saying 'revolving door, it was noted that the former FCC
chair was joining the telecom and media section at Carlyle:
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/02/business/02KENN.html

On May 7, European Venture Capital Journal identified the Carlyle
Group as heavy hitters with "an all-star roster of professionals
(that) just got stronger":
http://www.evcj.com/evcj/ZZZW91V8LKC.html

On May 13 when another conservative world leader cashed in his
chips and traded on his former government insider status and
knowledge of the regulatory system, the BBC ran a story
headlined: Major to chair private equity house

The London Times followed on May 26, noting that "The employment
of Bush Sr has attracted attention, mainly because his son is
ultimately responsible for awarding US arms contracts":
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,37-2001180089,00.html

In late September The Wall Street Journal touched on salient aspects of
the story last month by highlighting the bin Laden family investments in
the Carlyle Group, then dropped it like a hot 'tater. "Bin Laden
Family Could Profit >From a Jump In Defense Spending Due to Ties
to U.S. Bank," by Daniel Golden, James Bandler, and Marcus
Walker, The Wall Street Journal, 9/28/01

After the WSJ story, Judicial Watch spokesman Larry Klayman
posted a release uppping the ante. He was again ignored by the
mainstream when he said, "This conflict of interest has now
turned into a scandal. The idea of the President's father, an ex-
president himself, doing business with a company under
investigation by the FBI in the terror attacks of September 11 is
horrible. President Bush should not ask, but demand, that his
father pull out of the Carlyle Group."

A down under paper picked it up: Plus ca change, plus c'est la
meme chose.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/state/2001/10/28/FFX262DBATC.html

The confluence of Bush and bin Laden family interests was noted
briefly in the last item at:
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0111.whoswho.html

Along with others in the world press, India and Pakistani
newspapers have either either reported or copied aspects of the
perceived conflicts:
http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/280901/dLAME27.asp
http://news.indiatimes.com/articleshow.asp?art_id=1197180992

There's been a little but not much editorial comment:
http://baltimorechronicle.com/media3_oct01.shtml and indignation
at the Center for Public Integrity, which was then strangely
attacked by a Washington Post columnist.
http://www.public-i.org/story_01_103100.htm
http://www.public-i.org/commentary_01_042001.htm
http://www.public-i.org/story_01_021201.htm
Charles Lewis of the Center for Public Integrity discusses the revolving
door of the Carlyle Group.
(audio, Democracy, Now!, Pacifica Radio, March 6)

The WSJ story had legs. For a few weeks in October, the
mainstream, including LAT and the Chicago Tribune among others,
turned up the heat on Saudi Arabia, so much so that President
Bush felt compelled to call the Saudi Prince to thank him for
"cooperating" with the investigation to find the perpetrators of
the attacks on the Pentagon and Twin Towers.

On October 25, the NY Times' Elaine Sciolino and Neil MacFarquhar
told of the delicate dance: Naming of Hijackers as Saudis May
Further Erode Ties to U.S. The story ran with a photograph of
Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal with President Bush
in the Oval Office, noting that "the Saudis value such personal
contacts highly."

The engine at govexec.com presents and searches tables that sort
and order defense contractors. Among many tables that establish
the Carlyle Group as the 11th and sometimes 12th leading defense
contractor, depending on which branch of the armed forces is the
purchasing agent, there's one table that establishes President
Bush's family business as the 12th largest missile defense
contractor: http://www.govexec.com/top200/01top/catmissiles.htm
But only 32nd in defense contracting of electronics and
communications:
http://www.govexec.com/top200/01top/catelectronic.htm

The defense angle was covered by Defense News in August:
http://www.veritascapital.com/view_news.asp?ID=14

After 9 11, the Carlyle Group pulled the plug on its Web pages,
which are still visible in Google's cache but won't be for a lot
longer. Bush AND "Carlyle Group" is one possible search term.

Some U.S. editors are ignoring or downplaying the story while the
U.K. and other international press are interested. A topical
example from a recent week:

A buried one liner in a U.S. newspaper notes with no elaboration
the revolving door relationship between the administration and
the Carlyle Group:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14990-2001Oct30.html

Forty-five days after the dive-bombing at the Twin Towers,
another buried one liner confides that the bin Laden family will
no longer be doing business with the Bush family within the
Carlyle Group:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59924-2001Oct26.html

Part of the larger picture is explored at The Ex-President's Club
at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,583869,00.html

If this Guardian story is true, then there was not, as was widely
reported, a massive U.S. intelligence failure leading to 9 11.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4293682,00.html

Sydney Morning rewrote the above story, crediting the BBC:
Before 9 11, Bush told agents to back off bin Ladin family
http://www.smh.com.au/news/0111/07/world/world100.html


Reminiscent of Catch-22, right? Milo Minderbinder as President.

Happy hunting,

Alok Rai