Democracy Now! Naomi Klein asks Alan Greenspan about those missing billions in Iraq
By Nicole Belle Monday Sep 24, 2007 12:15pm
Once again, the best place to go for discussion of current events isn't the mainstream media. Democracy Now!'s Amy Goodman allows Naomi Klein to ask former Federal Reserve Chairman about his statement that the occupation in Iraq is all about the oil and those missing billions from Iraq.
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather)
The full interview is well worth your time and available on the Democracy Now! website.
Transcripts below the fold
AMY GOODMAN: We're also joined in studio by Naomi Klein, author of the book The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. Your response to that, Naomi Klein?
NAOMI KLEIN: Well, I'm just wondering if it troubles Mr. Greenspan at all that wars over resources in other countries are actually illegal. Mr. Greenspan has praised the rule of law, the importance of the rule of law, in his book. But in his statements about the reasons why this has not been publicly discussed, he has said that it's not politically expedient at this moment. But it's not just that it's not politically expedient, Mr. Greenspan. Are you aware that, according to the Hague Regulations and the Geneva Conventions, it is illegal for one country to invade another over its natural resources?
ALAN GREENSPAN: No. What I was saying is that the issue which, as you know, most people who were pressing for the war were concerned with were weapons of mass destruction. I personally believed that Saddam was behaving in a way that he probably very well had, almost certainly had, weapons of mass destruction. I was surprised, as most, that he didn't. But what I was saying is that my reason for being pleased to see Saddam out of office had nothing to do with the weapons of mass destruction. It had to do with the potential threat that he could create to the rest of the world.
NAOMI KLEIN: Yes, I realize that, but he was not simply deposed. The US invaded Iraq, occupied it and took control over its resources. And under international law, that it is illegal to wage wars to gain access to other countries', sovereign countries', natural resources.
ALAN GREENSPAN: Yes. No, I'm fully aware of the fact that that is a highly, terribly important issue. And as I said in other commentaries, I have always thought the issue of what essentially amounts to what is often called pre-emptive, preventive action on the part of some countries to secure resources or something else like that, it's an issue that goes back to the Cold War, when we had the very difficult moral dilemma of what do you do when you think a missile is coming in our direction and you're not sure whether it's an accident or not an accident. And that is a problem which I think is a deep moral problem in civilized society. And the issue is one which I don't think we're going to resolve very easily. And as you point out, yes, I am a believer in the rule of law, and I think it is a critical issue, not only for domestic economies, but for the world economy as a whole.
AMY GOODMAN: Naomi Klein?
NAOMI KLEIN: You have also advocated economic shock therapy and supported IMF programs that have transformed economies very, very quickly. And then, you say that you are in support of the rule of law. But I'm just wondering how, in a country like Russia, there could be rule of law when it's being transformed in fast-forward in that way.
ALAN GREENSPAN: Well, remember that you don't get a market economy merely by eliminating central planning. And remember, when the Berlin Wall came down and the Soviet Union disintegrated, you didn't have a market economy. What you basically had was a black market economy. And they tried to develop the institutions of the democratic society, and it's not something which they have had back for generations. And as you can see now, there's an increasing authoritarianism. It's a very -- it's a society which has very different trends at different levels of that society. And I don't know exactly where they're coming up, but I don't like the direction it's been going in in recent years.
AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to go back to Iraq and ask you about, well, a piece by Jim Steele and Don Barlett that came out in Vanity Fair, where they're talking about the billions lost in Iraq. And they begin their piece by saying, "Between April 2003 and June 2004, [$12 billion] in US currency -- much of it belonging to the Iraqi people -- was shipped from the Federal Reserve to Baghdad, where it was dispensed by the Coalition Provisional Authority. Some of the cash went to pay for projects and keep ministries afloat, but, incredibly, at least $9 billion has gone missing, unaccounted for, in a frenzy of mismanagement and greed."
Alan Greenspan, when you were head of the Federal Reserve, how much knowledge do you have of this? Did you investigate this? And did you investigate this? Were you aware of this at the time?
ALAN GREENSPAN: Well, let me say that what we were involved in was essentially endeavoring to create a viable currency for the central bank of Iraq. And what we did do was -- I think very successfully -- create what is a viable financial system, even under the circumstances that currently exist. There was, as far as I can judge, a huge drain of the resources into areas which nobody to this day can understand or follow. It had nothing to do with the central bank. In our relationships with them, we were merely acting as an intermediary to assist them in creating a system, which they now have, which is working reasonably well, despite all of the problems that are going on. The issue which you are referring to had nothing to do with the Federal Reserve in any of our relationships with the central bank.
AMY GOODMAN: Well, they are talking about, in one day, for example, the East Rutherford operation center of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, 100 Orchard Street in East Rutherford, a tractor-trailer truck pulling up, and though accustomed to receiving and shipping large quantities of cash, the vault had never before processed a single order of this magnitude: $2.4 billion in $100 bills. But ultimately, again, $9 billion of $12 billion gone missing in Iraq.
ALAN GREENSPAN: I am not familiar with any such evidence. And it was certainly not brought to my attention. I, frankly, find it very unlikely that those orders of magnitude were involved in any of the numbers that we were dealing with. You have to make certain that -- there's been a lot of confusion about losses, and people have used the dinar, the basic currency unit of Iraq, and assumed they were American dollars. And, of course, that gives you a highly distorted view. There's been, I've seen, several reports fairly recently in which that sort of mistake was being made. But what I can tell you is that no such numbers of any order of magnitude of the type you are discussing came to the attention of the Federal Reserve.
AMY GOODMAN: This is based on that award-winning article in Vanity Fair, or the team who have won --
ALAN GREENSPAN: Let me put it this way, award-winning doesn't necessarily --
AMY GOODMAN: Well, no, no. I mean Don Barlett and Jim Steele, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalists. I'm sure you know their work. But Naomi Klein?
NAOMI KLEIN: Well, I would just add that it's quite surprising, actually, that Mr. Greenspan is unaware of this scandal around Iraq's missing billions, because Paul Bremer had to testify before Congress and was asked directly about those missing billions. It's been the subject of very high-level investigations. There is a huge paper trail around it. So this is hardly a secret, and it's hardly just a matter that's confined to Vanity Fair. This is --
ALAN GREENSPAN: Oh, I'm not saying that the losses are not real. I think they are, because, obviously, we can't account for all the oil revenues. I'm just merely saying it's not something which was directly related to any of the actions which the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, to which we were referring, was involved, as far as I know.
Login or Register to post comments.
dnow should be mandatory listening for every adult. Period.
And he claimed not to know. Sound familiar?
Senility is obviously setting in.
I concur - - - - And the Goodmans' book 'Static' should be required reading!
Buscho got to Greenspan and put a horse head in his bed right next to Andrea Michell. That's why he's fillabustering here and backing away from the published oil statement.
Now this is a real story and I'm sick of people choosing to "forget" these realities. That is not going to cut it if we are going to get this country back in control of the hands of the people. People who deserve to control their own democracy don't let criminals steal their gold without questioning it and demanding answers. I'm a Naomi Klein kind of American.
Let's swear off the term, "mainstream media." Since web-based media outlets attract viewers in numbers that cable news and newspaper executives would die for, why not call them, "traditional media?" The internet is now the mainstream.
Whatta slinky-dink.
He spends minutes trying to convince us that people are confusing dinars with dollars, then when Klein reminds him that - oops! Bremer testified before Congress about the Billions of DOLLARS lost - he goes back to saying that none of this had anything to do with the Fed, hoping that we forget that the entire line of questioning was based on the fact that the largest ever "money drop" in cash (and in 100 dollar bills!!) was the 2.8 Billion DOLLARS that his boys put into a truck right there in good ol' New York City.
I am not defending Al, but saying the evidence comes from pulitzer prize winning journalists (and therefore how dare any question it) is, uh, pretty light.
I’m just merely saying it’s not something which was directly related to any of the actions which the
Federal Reserve BankJustice Department ofNew YorkWashington, to which we were referring, was involved, as far as I know.Just insert any Department, and any Location. Seems to be the standard talking points for them all.
>Let’s swear off the term, “mainstream media.”
Commercial Media works fine.
Describes it perfectly (countthe drug ads during the evening 'news' ...
How come its never used?
It is very much worth listening to. It is also worthwhile reading the transcript. It was billed as Greenspan vs Klein. Greenspan clearly comes out the winner in this "contest" (it is unfortunate that it was billed as one vs another). Klien's bias is far more evident than Greenspans, and Klein was not able to effectively discredit Greenspan, by any objective method. I also thought Greenspan handled Goodman's right wing tactic of interrupting and trying to change the change topics before he could respond to what was being asked.
This is why we have little chance for long term success. If you think Goodman and Klein (they were clearly on the same side in this "contest" bested Greenspan, which is obviously what they were trying to do, you are living in a dream world.
FYI - Alexander Cockburn's review of Naomi Klein's book "The Shock Doctrine" is the best one I've read so far.
Alan Greenspan's closing statement..."...... as far as I know". What a whoosey; covering
his ass as best he can, however, we in the know, know that he knows yet is trying to
protect his butt.
Dave K. @ 3:
I'm not willing to concede that -- nor would it apply during his reign which allowed multiple bubbles that did not affect the country club Republicans, but which led to pensions being written off in bankruptcies, etc.
I'm tired of this cat getting a free pass for his policies and actions, and claims that he tried to tell Congress in everyday language the consequences of deficit spending, etc. I will concede that today's Congress is sorely lacking in economic, science, history knowledge to cite just three examples.
However, I like Paul Krugman's economic thoughts better than this clown. From August, 2005:
Greenspan is as evil as he is ugly.
Down with the Federal Reserve!!!!
so senility in our national leaders is not a good thing?
ALAN GREENSPAN: "No. What I was saying is that the issue which, as you know, most people who were pressing for the war were concerned with were weapons of mass destruction. I personally believed that Saddam was behaving in a way that he probably very well had, almost certainly had, weapons of mass destruction. I was surprised, as most, that he didn’t."
huh???
who was surprised??
Rumsfeld??
Cheney??
and why does Amy let him state falsehoods like this without calling him on it??
"most certainly"???
most certainly DID NOT have WMDS!!!
EVERYONE KNEW IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If I tried to say "I don't recall" over losing my companies entire payroll, whether I was directly responsible for the theft itself or not, I'd be locked away.
New World Order, stinks of fascism.
off topic but i heard that the Congress just condemned Ahmadinejad, Can someone please start a petition to Condemn our Congress for being the biggest pussies in the world and rolling over for the king and spending our time and money condemning nonsense.
Alan Greenspan, the man who JUST said that Saddam certainly had WMD's, is calling Amy Goodman a liar!!
Biggus Diggus @ 5:
How would anyone ever know which is which??
There's a war going on, we should not question things.
This message has been approved by G. W. Bush.
then hes says , "Im not saying the loses arent real".
thats exactly what you just said you dumb pig fukr!
pathetic.
greenspan tries to distort information, and then when called on his bullshit he quickly backtracks.
also, he has used the 'missile analogy' before (specifically on crap-ass 60 minutes). such a misleading and dishonest argument. and, unfortunately it hasn't been publicly challenged.
greenspan, like colin powell, showed no courage when he had to potential to enact change. he didn't then, and now he is trying to profit off of his experience. again, pathetic.
further, greenspan sat as head of the federal reserve as our country slipped, economically speaking. he was chairman of the fed as the income gap between classes and countries grew ever higher. he was chairman as corporations placed a testicle cuff on america. he was chairman as jobs moved overseas and the american economy gravitated to a "third world" economy. where we export raw materials and import manufactured goods. this is greenspan's legacy. but he did what he was supposed to do: provide the basis for corporate takeover of the world economic system, and further the income gap. thanks allen. you suck.
Good God I hate these Fascist Pigs!!!!
Yellow Elephant Safari @ 22:
lmao
The short version:
Q: Something bad happened.
A: No, it didn't.
Q: I have proof something bad happened.
A: Yes, but it could have been worse.
Billions of American Taxpayer dollars has been missing for over two years now.
We have been waiting for Congress, reporters and journalists to get to the bottom of this.
and this..
Rumsfeld admitted to $2.3 trillion in transactions missing on Sept 10, 2001
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/main325985.shtml
And this..
Just why and who are killing journalists in Iraq?
http://www.cpj.org/Briefings/Iraq/Iraq_danger.html
• Photojournalists: 28 (Includes still photographers and camera operators.)
• Reporters and editors: 70
• Producers: 7
• Technicians: 7
And this..
A former financial reporter for Knight-Ridder, Business Week and the Financial Times of London
--> was shot dead at point-blank range by San Diego police officers
http://www.sianews.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=3247
and this..
Why are people dying... in Florida
http://www.insider-magazine.com/DeadUSattysOrig.html
Maybe Hillary can help explain this....
Bush quietly advising Hillary Clinton
http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/09/whats-new-14.html
Oh you're confused, it was Dinars. Not American Dollars....yeah, I believe that. Did anyone think of looking in Greenspans pockets or Bremmer's? While they're at it, maybe a look in the pockets of Cheney or Bush and any number of their conies might be worth it. This reminds of the deal with the missing tanker carrying Iraqi crude to Saudi Arabia for refining but never made it there. How do you loose a tanker? Hell, that's probably in their pockets also!
As if anyone can't see that war helps Crooks! Money can't be accounted for when you invade a country and wage war on it's people to overthrow one man, rip apart its land, and steal assets that don't belong to us. Wait a minute... sounds familiar doesn't it?
Mark @ 7:
What about "conventional media," or the more accurate "corporate mainstream media"
Call Chalabi and ask him if he knows anything about this missing money.
I doubt if Greenspan knows anything about the missing money. They most likely would have kept him in the dark just as they did the rest of us. The fewer people who know about a crime, the better.
Go Naomi (klein And Wolf)!!!!!
equilibrio @ 31:
the only real distinction, for me, is between corporate and independent media. and corporate media owns TV, magazines, newspapers, web sites, movies, etc., etc,. etc.
so, to differentiate btwn print or internet or TV or what have you, doesn't make a difference--really. what is important is media that exists outside of the corporate world, independent media (of all varieties: adbusters, democracy now, C&L, truthout, etc)
(sorry for the O/T)
Naomi Klein is a national treasure. Always speaking truth to power
DN! as usual, offers a rare exhibition of journalism. This should be required viewing by the general public.
Mr. Alan (I don't know nuthin') Greenspan has demonstrated that he managed to elevate himself to heights of public esteem which, obviously, he did not deserve.
I like that. He denies the numbers are real (says they're based on dinars), then says I'm not saying the numbers aren't real, just that the fed reserve doesn't have anything to do with it.
They caught him on a pretty profound lie/lack of concern there.
You are a liar Alan.
Samson- @ 34:
>the only real distinction, for me, is between corporate and independent media. and corporate media owns TV, magazines, newspapers, web sites, movies, etc., etc,. etc.
>so, to differentiate btwn print or internet or TV or what have you, doesn't make a difference--really. what is important is media that exists outside of the corporate world, independent media (of all varieties: adbusters, democracy now, C&L, truthout, etc)
The only distinction for me is if they are providing information fairly and honestly (doesnt have to be 'balanced' ) or they are just trying to sell you more crap --- be it pills to get it up or the latest Oceans 11 piece of junk, doesnt matter. Hence Commercial Media .
I would believe Paul Krugman and Naomi Klien any day before I would give any stock to this clown Greenspan. Why doesn't Greenspan ever say anything clearly and succinctly? Greenspeak was always a major topic in the financial press during his term as Fed chairman. Gallons of ink were spent deciphering his testimonials before Congress. Wall Street would savor every syllable tying to read the tea leaves he had to offer. Greenspan would have his say and then crawl back in his awaiting limo. He always talks in circles and pulls mysterious pieces of economic information out some secret vault. And we are suppose to look on in wonder and amazement. Give me a break. He never commits and is always high in his own ideological sky. He needed to get down to planet earth and mingle with the people who were effected by his libertarian policies. People were always only numbers on paper to him. Flesh and blood didn't count. A true Repub banker. No wonder Greenspan is so concerned with the dangers of "economic populism."
I look forward to reading Krugman's newest book. Krugman is the man.
I'm currently reading Naomi Klien's "Shock Doctrine." Fascinating read.
jr @ 36:
She is indeed a Canadian treasure (didnt say Canadian National cause its a railroad ;-)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naomi_Klein
Yellow Elephant Safari @ 22:
Nice one. But I did set you up perfectly!
Thank Christ for people like Naomi Klein! You keep speaking truth to "power"!! or is that "cower"?! What a lot of backpedalling, Alan Greenspan. You're a cohort of the Bu$h government and therefore a liar by association, not just deed and word.
just for fun google images 'cash iraq'
on my other comp. i have a picture of some iraqis in the back of a trailer throwing out bundles of u.s. dollars to the crowd.
i can't find that pic but there are plenty of others.
sadly i clicked one that had a soldier's pic there and went to a page that someone had made with their local service people on it.
when i googled 'money iraq' there was a pic of a soldier in a military vehicle--it was a memorial. he had been killed there.
i can't help myself now, everytime i see several pics of soldiers i wonder which one of them will be maimed or dead soon. i was in downtown san diego the other night and saw several young men with close cut hair, walking around, checking out the city. they're probably from the usmc training place in san di. they looked like kids to me. my own son is 34 now so these guys just looked like little kids. i swear this shit is breaking my heart.
If Greenspan ever gets bored, he has a bright future teaching tap dancing.
Just read the whole interview. Great piece of journalism, however, it's still not clear from the transcript, that the Federal Reserve is a private, for profit, corporation.
Even Amy Goodman's introduction, citing Greenspan's appointment by Reagan, serves to reinforce the false impression that the Federal Reserve is part of the Federal Government.
I though this quote by Greenspan stood out:
"President Bush had the wonderful characteristic of knowing that it was not to his advantage or to ours to interfere with the actions of the Federal Reserve. And I must say, through all of his years, he never once second-guessed what the Fed was doing. And that was very important to us, and we’ve been very much appreciative of that.
As others have posted, Russo's Freedom to Fascism is a good movie to watch.
Naomi Klein, please marry me.
Biggus Diggus @ 47:
Her husband is considered practically a Saint in Canuckistan, but good luck with that. :)
(....and GreenspunBushCheneyKrystolRice and on and on are war criminals)
Why didn't Greenspan speak out while he was still head of the Fed? Too chicken?
Greenspan is a criminal and he belongs in jail.
When interest rates bottomed out a few years ago, he went on record and told new home buyers and fixed rate mortgage holders to take out Adjustable Rate Mortgages, which includes the option arm and neg am loans that are now going into default in record numbers.
He gave absolutely the wrong advice at absolutely the wrong time. He knew very well that interest rates were about to go up because he was the one in charge of making them go up.
Because of his terrible advice, millions of Americans are losing their homes. The present mortgage crisis is mostly his fault. That's why he belongs behind bars and not behind a table signing copies of his new book.
A few days ago Greenspan was parading the idea that Bush invaded Iraq merely for the oil. Now that it has been brought to his attention that invading another country for its natural resource is regarded a crime under international law, he seems to have changed his mind. So typical.
I like "The Corporate Media" for a monikor. Cause they sure not "Liberal" any more and "Commercial Media" doesn't nail it describing the shills that the Major News Media have become for Corporate America.
When you respond to a simple question with multiple compound-complex sentences, chances are you won't be telling the truth.
The Short Version (Vol. II)
The short version:
Q: Something bad happened.
A: No, it didn’t.
Q: I have proof something bad happened.
A: I am not aware of that proof.
Q: It is not possible that you are unaware of that proof.
A: I didn't have anything to do with it though.
I have a very difficult time listening to anyone who refers to surplus taxes as belonging to corporations, who thinks that Social Security is an evil, had Ayn Rand as a mentor and who buys into the Neocons' might is right attitude.
Unless criminals are held to account in some forum, they can continue to lie without a second thought. Alan Greenspan can simply continue lying as he knows he will never, ever be held accountable for his criminal activities.
George @ 13:
Thanks, good read!
Pete @ 51:
I prefer "Corporate Crapaganda"
KevinSchmidt OjaiCA @ 49:
Greenspan made his goal of enriching a few banker types based on his policy. Those bankers were able to swindle billions from innocent home buyers. Then on top of that, the banks are going to the taxpayers for a bailout for the banks which they have been given. There is no bailout for the home owners. There is no end to the greed that Greenspan and his ilk have. The greed is surpassed only by the down right stupidity of the American people.
juanchopancho @ 57:
http://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/
The Treasury is printing money 24/7. Billions to Iraq and billions to the discount window to bail out the banks. M3 is total dollars floating around and nobody knows what that number is, even those whose job it is is to track it. The robbers have the keys to the vault and no one has the balls to raise their voice.
Inflation/stagnation is going to rocket. But after ten years of inflation, a billion will be like a million, and looking back in ten years, this invasion and this federal deficit will look like chump change... and so will your retirement account.
We hanged Nazis at Nuremberg for their part starting an aggressive war.
Think that something similar will happen to Bush and his Party? I doubt it.
I can't stand these fucking repukes who talk in that calm, pseudo-intellectual, condescending manner while they spew their lies and bullshit. And why does he keep pronouncing Sadaam "SadAMN". I almost broke my keyboard typing this. That's how much I fucking hate this piece of shit fascist bastard.
Orangutan. @ 6:
Well she's a canadian kind of American.
Anyway, Democracy Now! is great. I watch it every day, I've set up a bittorrent client to download the mp4 video automatically.
I had forgotten what a totally mind-boggling bullshitter Greenspan was.
Klein asks him a question about the illegality of attacking a country for its natural resources. Greenspan's reply starts off talking about oil, then suddenly shifts to a comment about missiles from unknown sources. WTF???
Then he replies to a question about the NINE BILLION in Benjamins stolen by BushCo's pals by first attributing it to a currency exchange error (gotta get your dinars straight, you stupid journalists!), but then, after he's cornered with Pulitzer evidence and congressional hearings, he calmly insists he didn't mean all that money wasn't stolen.
Total fucking bullshitter, non-stop, for his whole career. Alan Greenspan, you're a lying, thieving son of a bitch, and you belong in prison right along with the rest of the international criminal syndicate you represent.
Based on that interview I believe it's obvious that Greenspan should be in prison.
Riiiight, I listened to Greenspan hemming and hawing around Ms. Kleins inquiries. Yep, Alan Greenspan pretty much tap dances around the questions posed to him regarding the world he helped create with his policies. Revisionism is a favorite game of these kinds of people the day, year, or decade after, when all their big time plans turn out to be just another shit sammich for the majority to swallow.... I guess the real moral of the story, other than, as citizens, we need to pay better attention... is that expecting the truth out of a situation like this is kinda like a Las Vegas tourist commercial... Where vast sums of money, Iraq, and fed policy is concerned.. What happens at Fed, apparently stays at fed....
I think if anyone really wants to find out where that 9 of 12 mil went, hire a PI. to check hotel reservations in Cannes, London, Casablanca and yes, Vegas too...And any other locale the rediculously wealthy likes to go and blow money on gambling and hookers and various bobbles and bangles etc... Check against the timeline in question when the money was last seen and in some authorities control...Check who would likely gain from the disappearance and check who was suppose to be in charge and their wherabouts in the months after it was determined to be missing.... There are other steps and actions a good P.I. could take that I am not privy to the details of. The real truth could be ferreted out though in time.
It's just weirdly surreal to think this might be like some T.V. 'Rockford File' scenario, but it just might be that pedestrian and stupid....After all, regardless of all the smoke and mirrors at work here, at bottom, it's just another greed story with a big ol bag, (in this case 18 wheeler) of money turning up missing... A crime of profit. I think the technical term is grand theft... Greenspan is just doing his bit of spin on it to try and cover his own ass.....JD
After listening to this show anyone who considers Greenspan a genius has a very low standard. He actually said that we can't get rid of the debt and have a surplus because of what some people might do with all that extra money. So in his mind if our government is debt free and has a few hundred billion extra stashed away that money may go to waging war in Asia. Not that the money may be used in investing in our infrastructure, getting free from Middle East oil, fighting global warming, providing homes for the homeless, cleaning up superfund sites, no, Greenspan says that it will be used to wage atrocities.
I think someone retired from reality a long time ago, about the same time this "genius" thought that Bush's tax cuts for the rich would actually be a boon for the economy. Someone give me a Ph.D. in economics, I have it figured out better than Greenspan.
That was definitely the sort of response I'd expect from an economist; so certain of his own intellectual superiority that he doesn't even bother to formulate a good lie. He just assumes the whole world is as stupid as those airheads at Fox News.
Naomi Klein is HOT!!
Backpedaling
greenspan will undoubtably write another of his insights after bush leaves office and tell us the truth where the 9 billion went. but until then he is a sniveling turd.
At lest he made sure we don't have to worry about having Canadian quarters any more.
It's good to have Naomi Klein back with a new book.
Not read it yet but looking forward to. Anybody did ?
Mike @ 12:
You just hate reality. Right?? We aren't living in a dream world, you have put us in yours. (psss...wake up...it's later than you think.)
3 questions for Mr Greenspan.
How will the dollar recover from the 15 year historical low point it's currently at now? (Thanks, "W").
How tightly will the rich squeeze the middle class and poor before an armed upraising occurs?
And, I thought you were retired, so what gives?
Sure it's illegal to invade another country to steal its resources, but is there some other reason for invading a country that poses no immanent threat?
Naomi Klein is great. Right after this back and forth between her and Greenspan Jeremy Scahill came on and, once again, eloquently and accurately ripped into Blackwater. He discusses so many aspects of Blackwater that never make the news, its genuinely representative of the Bush Admin., and their dreams of empire in Iraq by privatizing their killing fields with BW spooks.
Greenspan is a blithering idiot.
WHY OH WHY OH WHY OH WHY can we not have an active, engaged media who actually puts these stupid fucks on the spot and makes them answer intelligent questions? What is this bullshit letting these C- performers skate through to important elective offices?
Oil revenues? Unaccounted Iraqi oil revenues?
No Mr. Greenspan. The Fed, a private corporation, sent billions of dollars into Iraq that was knowingly stolen from the Iraqi people by the conmen in the Bush Junta that you fronted for as bagman.
Granted, it is the Feds money but, have you checked the worth of the dollars lately? Convert all your US dollars into gold and if you're short on cash turn it over to silver. The crash is coming.
I thought Cockburn was harsh on Klein. After having watched her interviewing Greenspan and letting him spin every question thrown at him, I think Cockburn is on the mark. She is overrated, a mouthpiece of left, right, center and whatever else, and lacks spine to follow up on her questions and pounce on them. The man dodged every question. Goodman and Klein were so awed by the man that they did not dare to stay the course and force him to clarify his position. For example, instead of responding one way or other to the question of whether or not it is legal to invade a sovereign state for the purpose of taking over its natural resources, he talked about an incoming missile. That is quite a spin.
The two of them looked small, insignificant and pathetic.
You notice that he seemed much more concerned about proping up the name of the Federal Reserve Bank and the newly formed Central Bank of Iraq, than he was with figuring out just what happened to the 9 billion US Dollars. That' s all these people care about; ensuring that people don't start looking at how these organizations have been ripping us off for decades.
We should print our own money, and go back to the gold standard, and get our gold back from the Federal Reserve Bank.
The world needs more Amy Goodman, Naomi Klien and Jeremy Skahil who followed -- and more Crooks and Liars!
If we had just reasonable media such as this as the mainstream media , the public wouldn't be douped by the likes of Bush and financial policies that have the poor pay the rich with their taxes.
"I personally believed that Saddam was behaving in a way that he probably very well had, almost certainly had, weapons of mass destruction. I was surprised, as most, that he didn’t."
...but yet, these "surprised"people are still in charge and they love to still villify as whacked out lefties those who weren't surprised, who were perceptive enough to know we were being hoodwinked by the administration.
Why does the MSM still go to these gullible dips, like Greenspan? What else are they ignorant of? Certainly not where the $9b went to. And what else have they screwed up that we haven't heard about...?