Informazione
PSICHIATRIZZARE BOBBY FISHER
Pino Catapano ha raccolto sulla rete un po' di informazioni su Bobby
Fischer: "Uno che, al di là di qualche sua uscita più o meno
condivisibile, merita il massimo rispetto e solidarietà da chi si
dichiara anche soltanto progressista." Si metta a confronto questa Nota
biografica con l'articoletto del "Manifesto" (allegato), che riprende a
pappagallo le veline statunitensi...
Nota biografica su Bobby Fisher
Bobby Fischer nasce a Chicago nel 1943. Sua madre è un'ebrea sovietica
emigrata negli USA. Bobby a 6 anni impara a giocare a scacchi e a 15,
nel 1958, diventa il più giovane Gran Maestro nella storia degli
scacchi. Egli allora manifesta l'intenzione di andare in Unione
Sovietica per approfondire ancor di più la sua passione e insieme alla
madre vanno a Mosca per qualche tempo. Siamo nell'epoca del maccartismo
più sfrenato e Bobby entra ufficialmente tra i controllati dall'FBI,
mentre il file sulla madre risale agli anni '40. Addirittura sospettati
di essere spie del Kgb, la cosa non viene mai provata, ma le attenzioni
dell'FBI su Bobby, estremamente critico sulla politica USA, rimangono.
Come molti dei grandi geni, anche Bobby va male a scuola e l'abbandona.
Nel 1972 comunque diventa famoso in tutto il mondo per essere diventato
l'11° campione del mondo di scacchi, il primo non sovietico della
storia. Prima del "match del secolo" con il russo Spassky persino
Kissinger chiama Bobby al telefono.
Ribelle ed eccentrico per natura, tale da sembrare un pazzo squilibrato
ai superficiali, sprezzante verso la politica e la ragion di stato USA,
il suo trionfo non può essere usato dal governo come ci si
aspetterebbe. Nonostante le ripetute minacce, l'amministrazione USA, ad
esempio, non riuscì mai ad impedire che Bobby si recasse a L'Avana per
qualche partitella con Fidel Castro.
Nel 1975 Fischer, per screzi con la Federazione internazionale degli
scacchi sulle regole per l'attribuzione del titolo, viene privato del
titolo mondiale, dopo il rifiuto di Bobby di giocare con Anatoly
Karpov. Qui si spengono i riflettori sul genio americano, che abbandona
il gioco degli scacchi. Nel 1981 Bobby viene scambiato per un
rapinatore di banca e arrestato dalla polizia, a seguito di questo
episodio scrive il pamphlet "I Was Tortured in the Pasadena
Jailhouse!". Nel 1984 Bobby scrive alla "Encyclopaedia Judaica",
intimandoli di cancellare il suo nome dalle loro pubblicazioni per il
fatto che lui non era ebreo, non essendo nemmeno circonciso.
Nel 1992 il "fattaccio". Su invito della federazione Russa e di
Slobodan Milosevic, Bobby Fischer viene chiamato per giocare la
rivincita con Spassky in Jugoslavia, premio in palio 3,5 milioni di
dollari. Bobby allora riceve dalla giustizia americana una lettera di
diffida con un ordine esecutivo firmato George Bush senior, a recarsi
in Jugoslavia, paese sottoposto ad embargo ed al divieto di viaggio ai
cittadini americani. Bobby in una pubblica conferenza stampa sputa
sulla lettera e va in Jugoslavia, vincendo per la seconda volta contro
Spassky. La giustizia USA allora lo condanna in contumacia a 10 anni di
reclusione ed emette contro di lui un mandato di cattura internazionale.
In questi anni di "latitanza" in cui gli è precluso il ritorno negli
USA, Bobby si stabilisce prima in Ungheria e poi in vari paesi
dell'Asia, soprattutto nelle Filippine. Ha il tempo di inventare (con
tanto di brevetto) un nuovo tipo di segnatempo digitale per le partite.
Inoltre, nel '96 egli annuncia da Buenos Aires, una variante del gioco
nota come Fischer Random Chess, che consiste nella possibilità del
giocatore di scegliere la disposizione iniziale dei pezzi, evitando
così di impararsi le aperture a memoria e rendere il gioco più
imprevedibile.
Degna di nota la sua amicizia con il Gran Maestro Eugenio Torre, il più
gran giocatore di scacchi filippino di tutti i tempi, persona che gli
sta vicino e lo aiuta. Tra il '98 e il '99 tutto il patrimonio di Bobby
negli USA viene confiscato e venduto all'asta. Egli si ritiene vittima
di una congiura ordita dall'"ebreo" Bob Ellsworth. Il suo odio per gli
USA e per gli ebrei aumenta.
L'11 settembre del 2001 Bobby si trova nelle Filippine e in una delle
sue tante interviste a "Radio Bombo", quando le notizie sugli attentati
sono ancora frammentarie, dice: "This is all wonderful news,". "I
applaud the act. The U.S. and Israel have been slaughtering the
Palestinians, just slaughtering them for years. Robbing them and
slaughtering them. Nobody gave a shit. Now it's coming back to the U.S.
Fuck the U.S. I want to see the U.S. wiped out.".
Questa cosa ed altri commenti antisionisti più che antisemiti sono le
cause della decisione della Federazione scacchistica USA di radiarlo
nel 2003.
Siamo giunti al 13 luglio 2004, Bobby in possesso di regolare
passaporto USA rilasciato dall'ambasciata di Berna, viene violentemente
arrestato e malmenato dalle autorità nipponiche all'aeroporto di Tokio,
mentre si accingeva a tornare a Manila, in uno dei suoi frequenti
spostamenti tra le due capitali. Sembrerebbe che il passaporto sia
stato revocato dalle autorità USA nel 2003, ma la vicenda ha risvolti
poco chiari, al momento: la pagina internet dedicata a Bobby parla di
aggressione e violente percosse da parte degli agenti giapponesi. Fatti
che paiono francamente eccessivi per un semplice problema di permessi.
La sensazione è che qualche lunga mano si sia mossa dagli Stati Uniti,
visto che non era certo la prima volta che Bobby andava a Tokio.
E' intenzione dei giapponesi estradare Bobby negli USA, dove rischia 10
anni di reclusione, magari in un ospedale psichiatrico, dato che la
stampa USA non ha lesinato certo risorse per dipingerlo come un pazzo.
Le ultime notizie dicono che Bobby sta chiedendo asilo politico verso
un paese terzo disposto a concederglielo.
(a cura di Pino Catapano)
http://www.ilmanifesto.it/Quotidiano-archivio/21-Luglio-2004/art65.html
il manifesto - 21 Luglio 2004
L'ultima mossa di Bobby Fischer
Il campione in attesa di estradizione da Tokyo agli Usa chiede asilo a
qualche «paese amico»
IGOR FIATTI
Altra mossa a sorpresa dell'ex campione di scacchi americano Bobby
Fischer. Arrestato la settimana scorsa dalle autorità giapponesi
all'aeroporto Narita di Tokio per il possesso di un passaporto non
valido, e ricercato dagli Usa per aver violato nel 1992 le sanzioni
internazionali contro la Jugoslavia accettando di disputare nel paese
sotto embargo la rivincita del suo storico match del 1972 contro il
sovietico Boris Spassky, Fischer ha chiesto asilo politico in un paese
terzo per evitare l'estradizione negli Usa. «Bobby Fischer non vuole
rimanere in Giappone, dominato dall'America, corrotto, brutale e
ostile», ha detto la presidente della federazione giapponese di
scacchi, Myoko Watai, amica dello scacchista che vinse la «battaglia
del secolo», come fu allora battezzata la partita metafora della guerra
fredda tra Mosca e Washington. «Né tanto meno tornare negli Stati
Uniti, dove lo aspetta una corte speciale, dieci anni di prigione e
forse anche una morte prematura», ha aggiunto la Watai.
32 anni fa, la partita che metteva in palio il titolo di campione
mondiale di scacchi tra il genio eccentrico americano, Bobby Fischer, e
il detentore, il sovietico Boris Spassky catturò l'attenzione del
pianeta. La sfida fu giocata nella capitale islandese Reykyavik, a metà
strada tra le due superpotenze. Il match del secolo rimase in forse
fino all'ultimo: l'incontro si svolse solo dopo che furono accettate
tutte le pretese dello sfidante; Fischer chiese e ottenne una borsa di
138 mila dollari e si arrivò alla scelta dell'Islanda solo dopo che
l'americano fece fallire i grandi sforzi e sacrifici affrontati dalla
federazione scacchistica jugoslava, che aveva preparato una
organizzazione grandiosa.
Appena arrivato offese gli islandesi, definendo l'Islanda inadeguata
per l'evento perché non aveva un bowling. Poi si lamentò di tutto:
delle telecamere, delle luci, del tavolo, delle sedie. Fischer,
definito dalla stampa squilibrato e paranoico, accettò di giocare solo
dopo che un miliardario inglese raddoppiò il premio partita, portandolo
a 250 mila dollari. Dopo la vittoria, il ragazzo di Brooklyn avrebbe
dovuto sfidare il sovietico Anatolij Karpov nel 1975, ma impose per il
match regole così bizzarre che l'associazione scacchistica
internazionale lo privò del titolo, assegnandolo d'ufficio al
sovietico. Poi Fischer scomparve sino alla rivincita della «battaglia
del secolo» organizzata in Jugoslavia nel 1992.
Prima di giocare nella città montenegrina di Sveti Stefan, Fischer
ricevette una lettera del dipartimento del tesoro Usa che gli intimava
di rinunciare al match. Il campione sputò sulla lettera durante una
memorabile conferenza stampa. Giocò e vinse di nuovo, diventando un
ricercato. Poi il fece perdere le sue tracce in Asia, tra Giappone e
Filippine. Negli ultimi anni spediva fax dalla sede della federazione
di scacchi giapponese e interveniva sulle frequenze di una radio
filippina, Radio Bombo, con discorsi antisemiti e antiamericani. Le
autorità giapponesi lo hanno arrestato all'aeroporto di Tokio mentre
stava partendo per le Filippine, che intanto gli avevano revocato il
passaporto.
Adesso, il campione aspetta l'eventuale estradizione negli Usa in una
cella giapponese; ma per ribaltare la partita ha ancora una mossa a
disposizione, l'accoglimento della domanda di asilo da parte di qualche
«paese amico».
Pino Catapano ha raccolto sulla rete un po' di informazioni su Bobby
Fischer: "Uno che, al di là di qualche sua uscita più o meno
condivisibile, merita il massimo rispetto e solidarietà da chi si
dichiara anche soltanto progressista." Si metta a confronto questa Nota
biografica con l'articoletto del "Manifesto" (allegato), che riprende a
pappagallo le veline statunitensi...
Nota biografica su Bobby Fisher
Bobby Fischer nasce a Chicago nel 1943. Sua madre è un'ebrea sovietica
emigrata negli USA. Bobby a 6 anni impara a giocare a scacchi e a 15,
nel 1958, diventa il più giovane Gran Maestro nella storia degli
scacchi. Egli allora manifesta l'intenzione di andare in Unione
Sovietica per approfondire ancor di più la sua passione e insieme alla
madre vanno a Mosca per qualche tempo. Siamo nell'epoca del maccartismo
più sfrenato e Bobby entra ufficialmente tra i controllati dall'FBI,
mentre il file sulla madre risale agli anni '40. Addirittura sospettati
di essere spie del Kgb, la cosa non viene mai provata, ma le attenzioni
dell'FBI su Bobby, estremamente critico sulla politica USA, rimangono.
Come molti dei grandi geni, anche Bobby va male a scuola e l'abbandona.
Nel 1972 comunque diventa famoso in tutto il mondo per essere diventato
l'11° campione del mondo di scacchi, il primo non sovietico della
storia. Prima del "match del secolo" con il russo Spassky persino
Kissinger chiama Bobby al telefono.
Ribelle ed eccentrico per natura, tale da sembrare un pazzo squilibrato
ai superficiali, sprezzante verso la politica e la ragion di stato USA,
il suo trionfo non può essere usato dal governo come ci si
aspetterebbe. Nonostante le ripetute minacce, l'amministrazione USA, ad
esempio, non riuscì mai ad impedire che Bobby si recasse a L'Avana per
qualche partitella con Fidel Castro.
Nel 1975 Fischer, per screzi con la Federazione internazionale degli
scacchi sulle regole per l'attribuzione del titolo, viene privato del
titolo mondiale, dopo il rifiuto di Bobby di giocare con Anatoly
Karpov. Qui si spengono i riflettori sul genio americano, che abbandona
il gioco degli scacchi. Nel 1981 Bobby viene scambiato per un
rapinatore di banca e arrestato dalla polizia, a seguito di questo
episodio scrive il pamphlet "I Was Tortured in the Pasadena
Jailhouse!". Nel 1984 Bobby scrive alla "Encyclopaedia Judaica",
intimandoli di cancellare il suo nome dalle loro pubblicazioni per il
fatto che lui non era ebreo, non essendo nemmeno circonciso.
Nel 1992 il "fattaccio". Su invito della federazione Russa e di
Slobodan Milosevic, Bobby Fischer viene chiamato per giocare la
rivincita con Spassky in Jugoslavia, premio in palio 3,5 milioni di
dollari. Bobby allora riceve dalla giustizia americana una lettera di
diffida con un ordine esecutivo firmato George Bush senior, a recarsi
in Jugoslavia, paese sottoposto ad embargo ed al divieto di viaggio ai
cittadini americani. Bobby in una pubblica conferenza stampa sputa
sulla lettera e va in Jugoslavia, vincendo per la seconda volta contro
Spassky. La giustizia USA allora lo condanna in contumacia a 10 anni di
reclusione ed emette contro di lui un mandato di cattura internazionale.
In questi anni di "latitanza" in cui gli è precluso il ritorno negli
USA, Bobby si stabilisce prima in Ungheria e poi in vari paesi
dell'Asia, soprattutto nelle Filippine. Ha il tempo di inventare (con
tanto di brevetto) un nuovo tipo di segnatempo digitale per le partite.
Inoltre, nel '96 egli annuncia da Buenos Aires, una variante del gioco
nota come Fischer Random Chess, che consiste nella possibilità del
giocatore di scegliere la disposizione iniziale dei pezzi, evitando
così di impararsi le aperture a memoria e rendere il gioco più
imprevedibile.
Degna di nota la sua amicizia con il Gran Maestro Eugenio Torre, il più
gran giocatore di scacchi filippino di tutti i tempi, persona che gli
sta vicino e lo aiuta. Tra il '98 e il '99 tutto il patrimonio di Bobby
negli USA viene confiscato e venduto all'asta. Egli si ritiene vittima
di una congiura ordita dall'"ebreo" Bob Ellsworth. Il suo odio per gli
USA e per gli ebrei aumenta.
L'11 settembre del 2001 Bobby si trova nelle Filippine e in una delle
sue tante interviste a "Radio Bombo", quando le notizie sugli attentati
sono ancora frammentarie, dice: "This is all wonderful news,". "I
applaud the act. The U.S. and Israel have been slaughtering the
Palestinians, just slaughtering them for years. Robbing them and
slaughtering them. Nobody gave a shit. Now it's coming back to the U.S.
Fuck the U.S. I want to see the U.S. wiped out.".
Questa cosa ed altri commenti antisionisti più che antisemiti sono le
cause della decisione della Federazione scacchistica USA di radiarlo
nel 2003.
Siamo giunti al 13 luglio 2004, Bobby in possesso di regolare
passaporto USA rilasciato dall'ambasciata di Berna, viene violentemente
arrestato e malmenato dalle autorità nipponiche all'aeroporto di Tokio,
mentre si accingeva a tornare a Manila, in uno dei suoi frequenti
spostamenti tra le due capitali. Sembrerebbe che il passaporto sia
stato revocato dalle autorità USA nel 2003, ma la vicenda ha risvolti
poco chiari, al momento: la pagina internet dedicata a Bobby parla di
aggressione e violente percosse da parte degli agenti giapponesi. Fatti
che paiono francamente eccessivi per un semplice problema di permessi.
La sensazione è che qualche lunga mano si sia mossa dagli Stati Uniti,
visto che non era certo la prima volta che Bobby andava a Tokio.
E' intenzione dei giapponesi estradare Bobby negli USA, dove rischia 10
anni di reclusione, magari in un ospedale psichiatrico, dato che la
stampa USA non ha lesinato certo risorse per dipingerlo come un pazzo.
Le ultime notizie dicono che Bobby sta chiedendo asilo politico verso
un paese terzo disposto a concederglielo.
(a cura di Pino Catapano)
http://www.ilmanifesto.it/Quotidiano-archivio/21-Luglio-2004/art65.html
il manifesto - 21 Luglio 2004
L'ultima mossa di Bobby Fischer
Il campione in attesa di estradizione da Tokyo agli Usa chiede asilo a
qualche «paese amico»
IGOR FIATTI
Altra mossa a sorpresa dell'ex campione di scacchi americano Bobby
Fischer. Arrestato la settimana scorsa dalle autorità giapponesi
all'aeroporto Narita di Tokio per il possesso di un passaporto non
valido, e ricercato dagli Usa per aver violato nel 1992 le sanzioni
internazionali contro la Jugoslavia accettando di disputare nel paese
sotto embargo la rivincita del suo storico match del 1972 contro il
sovietico Boris Spassky, Fischer ha chiesto asilo politico in un paese
terzo per evitare l'estradizione negli Usa. «Bobby Fischer non vuole
rimanere in Giappone, dominato dall'America, corrotto, brutale e
ostile», ha detto la presidente della federazione giapponese di
scacchi, Myoko Watai, amica dello scacchista che vinse la «battaglia
del secolo», come fu allora battezzata la partita metafora della guerra
fredda tra Mosca e Washington. «Né tanto meno tornare negli Stati
Uniti, dove lo aspetta una corte speciale, dieci anni di prigione e
forse anche una morte prematura», ha aggiunto la Watai.
32 anni fa, la partita che metteva in palio il titolo di campione
mondiale di scacchi tra il genio eccentrico americano, Bobby Fischer, e
il detentore, il sovietico Boris Spassky catturò l'attenzione del
pianeta. La sfida fu giocata nella capitale islandese Reykyavik, a metà
strada tra le due superpotenze. Il match del secolo rimase in forse
fino all'ultimo: l'incontro si svolse solo dopo che furono accettate
tutte le pretese dello sfidante; Fischer chiese e ottenne una borsa di
138 mila dollari e si arrivò alla scelta dell'Islanda solo dopo che
l'americano fece fallire i grandi sforzi e sacrifici affrontati dalla
federazione scacchistica jugoslava, che aveva preparato una
organizzazione grandiosa.
Appena arrivato offese gli islandesi, definendo l'Islanda inadeguata
per l'evento perché non aveva un bowling. Poi si lamentò di tutto:
delle telecamere, delle luci, del tavolo, delle sedie. Fischer,
definito dalla stampa squilibrato e paranoico, accettò di giocare solo
dopo che un miliardario inglese raddoppiò il premio partita, portandolo
a 250 mila dollari. Dopo la vittoria, il ragazzo di Brooklyn avrebbe
dovuto sfidare il sovietico Anatolij Karpov nel 1975, ma impose per il
match regole così bizzarre che l'associazione scacchistica
internazionale lo privò del titolo, assegnandolo d'ufficio al
sovietico. Poi Fischer scomparve sino alla rivincita della «battaglia
del secolo» organizzata in Jugoslavia nel 1992.
Prima di giocare nella città montenegrina di Sveti Stefan, Fischer
ricevette una lettera del dipartimento del tesoro Usa che gli intimava
di rinunciare al match. Il campione sputò sulla lettera durante una
memorabile conferenza stampa. Giocò e vinse di nuovo, diventando un
ricercato. Poi il fece perdere le sue tracce in Asia, tra Giappone e
Filippine. Negli ultimi anni spediva fax dalla sede della federazione
di scacchi giapponese e interveniva sulle frequenze di una radio
filippina, Radio Bombo, con discorsi antisemiti e antiamericani. Le
autorità giapponesi lo hanno arrestato all'aeroporto di Tokio mentre
stava partendo per le Filippine, che intanto gli avevano revocato il
passaporto.
Adesso, il campione aspetta l'eventuale estradizione negli Usa in una
cella giapponese; ma per ribaltare la partita ha ancora una mossa a
disposizione, l'accoglimento della domanda di asilo da parte di qualche
«paese amico».
[ Un esempio del lavoro della (associata della Halliburton di Dick
Cheney)
Kellogg Brown & Root nei Balcani e' Camp Bondsteel... Bondsteel e' la
piu' vasta e costosa base militare edificata dai tempi del Vietnam.
Essa si trova
sul percorso dell'oleodotto trans-balcanico AMBO (Albanian-Macedonian-
Bulgarian Oil), che unisce la regione del Caspio, ricca di petrolio, al
resto del
mondo... ]
"One example of the work KBR did in the Balkans was Camp Bondsteel...
Bondsteel is the largest and most expensive army base since Vietnam. It
also happens to be built in the path of the
Albanian-Macedonian-Bulgarian
Oil (Ambo) Trans-Balkan pipeline, the pipeline connecting the oil-rich
Caspian
Sea region to the rest of the world..."
Profits of war
Halliburton has become a byword for the cosy links between the White
House
and Texan big business. But how did the company run in the 90s by Dick
Cheney secure a deal that guaranteed it millions in profit every time
the
US military saw action? In this exclusive extract from his new book, Dan
Briody reveals how the firm made a killing on the battleground
Thursday July 22, 2004
The Guardian
On January 12 1991, Congress authorised President George HW Bush to
engage
Iraq in war. Just five days later, Operation Desert Storm commenced in
Kuwait. As with the more recent war in the Gulf, it did not take long
for
the US to claim victory - it was all over by the end of February - but
the
clean-up would last longer, and was far more expensive than the military
action itself. In a senseless act of desperation and defeat, Iraqi
troops
set fire to more than 700 Kuwaiti oil wells, resulting in a constant fog
of thick, black smoke that turned day into night.
It was thought the mess would take no less than five years to clean up,
as
lakes of oil surrounding each well blazed out of control, making it
nearly
impossible to approach the burning wells, let alone extinguish them. But
with the fighting over, Halliburton angled its way into the clean-up and
rebuilding effort that was expected to cost around $200bn (£163bn) over
the next 10 years.
The company sent 60 men to help with the firefighting effort. Meanwhile,
its engineering and construction subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR)
won
an additional $3m contract to assess the damage that the invasion had
done
to Kuwait's infrastructure - a contract whose value had multiplied seven
times by the end of KBR's involvement. More significantly still, KBR
won a
contract to extract troops from Saudi Arabia after their services were
no
longer needed in the Gulf. Halliburton was back in the army logistics
business in earnest for the first time since Vietnam. The end of the
Gulf
war saw nothing less than the rebirth of the military outsourcing
business.
Military outsourcing was not new. Private firms had been aiding in war
efforts since long before KBR won its first naval shipbuilding contract.
But the nature of military outsourcing has changed dramatically in the
last decade. The trend towards a "downsized" military began because of
the
"peace dividend" at the end of the cold war, and continued throughout
the
1990s. This combination of a reduced military but continued conflict
gave
rise to an unprecedented new industry of private military firms. These
firms would assist the military in everything from weapons procurement
and
maintenance to training of troops and logistics.
In the decade after the first Gulf war, the number of private
contractors
used in and around the battlefield increased tenfold. It has been
estimated that there is now one private contractor for every 10 soldiers
in Iraq. Companies such as Halliburton, which became the fifth largest
defence contractor in the nation during the 1990s, have played a
critical
role in this trend.
The story behind America's "super contract" begins in 1992, when the
department of defence, then headed by Dick Cheney, was impressed with
the
work Halliburton did during its time in Kuwait. Sensing the need to
bolster its forces in the event of further conflicts of a similar
nature,
the Pentagon asked private contractors to bid on a $3.9m contract to
write
a report on how a private firm could provide logistical support to the
army in the case of further military action.
The report was to examine 13 different "hot spots" around the world, and
detail how services as varied as building bases to feeding the troops
could be accomplished. The contractor that would potentially provide the
services detailed in the report would be required to support the
deployment of 20,000 troops over 180 days. It was a massive contingency
plan, the first of its kind for the American military.
Thirty-seven companies tendered for the contract; KBR won it. The
company
was paid another $5m later that year to extend the plan to other
locations
and add detail.
The KBR report, which remains classified to this day, convinced Cheney
that it was indeed possible to create one umbrella contract and award it
to a single firm. The contract became known as the Logistics Civil
Augmentation Programme (Logcap) and has been called "the mother of all
service contracts". It has been used in every American deployment since
its award in 1992 - at a cost of several billion dollars (and counting).
The lucky recipient of the first, five-year Logcap contract was the very
same company hired to draw up the plan in the first place: KBR.
The Logcap contract pulled KBR out of its late 1980s doldrums and
boosted
the bottom line of Halliburton throughout the 1990s. It is,
effectively, a
blank cheque from the government. The contractor makes its money from a
built-in profit percentage, anywhere from 1% to 9%, depending on various
incentive clauses. When your profit is a percentage of the cost, the
more
you spend, the more you make.
Before the ink was dry on the first Logcap contract, the US army was
deployed to Somalia in December 1992 as part of Operation Restore Hope.
KBR employees were there before the army even arrived, and they were the
last to leave. The firm made $109.7m in Somalia. In August 1994, they
earned $6.3m from Operation Support Hope in Rwanda. In September of that
same year, Operation Uphold Democracy in Haiti netted the company $150m.
And in October 1994, Operation Vigilant Warrior made them another $5m.
In the spirit of "refuse no job", the company was building the base
camps,
supplying the troops with food and water, fuel and munitions, cleaning
latrines, even washing their clothes. They attended the staff meetings
and
were kept up to speed on all the activities related to a given mission.
They were becoming another unit in the US army.
The army's growing dependency on the company hit home when, in 1997, KBR
lost the Logcap contract in a competitive rebid to rival Dyncorp. The
army
found it impossible to remove Brown & Root from their work in the
Balkans
- by far the most lucrative part of the contract - and so carved out the
work in that theatre to keep it with KBR. In 2001, the company won the
Logcap contract again, this time for twice the normal term length: 10
years.
To the uninitiated, the appointment of Cheney to the chairman,
president,
and chief executive officer positions at Halliburton in August 1995,
made
little sense. Cheney had almost no business experience, having been a
career politician and bureaucrat. Financial analysts downgraded the
stock
and the business press openly questioned the decision.
Cheney has been described by those who know him as everything from
low-key
to downright bland, but the confidence he inspired and the loyalty he
professed made him an indispensable part of Donald Rumsfeld's rise to
power. In the 1970s, Rumsfeld became Gerald Ford's White House chief of
staff, with Cheney as his deputy. In those days, Cheney was assigned a
codename by the secret service that perfectly summed up his disposition:
"Backseat".
But Halliburton understood Cheney's value. With him as CEO, the company
gained considerable leverage in Washington. Until Cheney's appointment
in
the autumn of 1995, Halliburton's business results had been decent.
After
a loss of $91m in 1993, the company had returned to profitability in
1994
with an operating profit of $236m. With the new revenue coming in from
Logcap, Halliburton and its prize subsidiary, KBR, were back on track.
Though Logcap was producing only modest revenues, it was successful in
reintegrating KBR into the military machine.
The big opportunity came in December 1995, just two months after Cheney
assumed the post of CEO, when the US sent thousands of troops to the
Balkans as a peace-keeping force. As part of Operation Joint Endeavour,
KBR was dispatched to Bosnia and Kosovo to support the army in its
operations in the region. The task was massive in scope and size.
One example of the work KBR did in the Balkans was Camp Bondsteel. The
camp was so large that the US general accounting office (GAO) likened it
to "a small town". The company built roads, power generation, water and
sewage systems, housing, a helicopter airfield, a perimeter fence, guard
towers, and a detention centre. Bondsteel is the largest and most
expensive army base since Vietnam. It also happens to be built in the
path
of the Albanian-Macedonian-Bulgarian Oil (Ambo) Trans-Balkan pipeline,
the
pipeline connecting the oil-rich Caspian Sea region to the rest of the
world. The initial feasibility project for Ambo was done by KBR.
KBR's cash flow from Logcap ballooned under Cheney's tenure, jumping
from
$144m in 1994 to more than $423m in 1996, and the Balkans was the
driving
force. By 1999, the army was spending just under $1bn a year on KBR's
work
in the Balkans. The GAO issued a report in September 2000 charging
serious
cost-control problems in Bosnia, but KBR retains the contract to this
day.
Meanwhile, Cheney was busy developing Halliburton's business in other
parts of the world. "It is a false dichotomy that we have to choose
between our commercial and other interests," he told the [public policy
research foundation] Cato Institute in 1998, speaking out against
economic
sanctions levied by the Clinton administration against countries
suspected
of terrorist activity. "Our government has become sanctions-happy," he
continued.
In particular, Cheney objected to sanctions against Libya and Iran, two
countries with which Halliburton was already doing business regardless.
Even more disconcerting, though, was the work the company did in Iraq.
Between his stints as secretary of defence and vice-president, Cheney
was
in charge of Halliburton when it was circumventing strict UN sanctions,
helping to rebuild Iraq and enriching Saddam Hussein.
In September 1998, Halliburton closed a $7.7bn stock merger with Dresser
Industries (the company that gave George HW Bush his first job). The
merger made Halliburton the largest oilfield services firm in the world.
It also brought with it two foreign subsidiaries that were doing
business
with Iraq via the controversial Oil for Food programme. The two
subsidiaries, Dresser Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co, signed
$73m-worth of contracts for oil production equipment.
Cheney told the press during his 2000 run for vice-president that he
had a
"firm policy" against doing business with Iraq. He admitted to doing
business with Iran and Libya, but "Iraq's different," he said. Cheney
told
ABC TV: "We've not done any business in Iraq since UN sanctions were
imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a standing policy that I wouldn't do
that."
Three weeks later, Cheney was forced to admit the business ties, but
claimed ignorance. He told reporters that he was not aware of Dresser's
business in Iraq, and that besides, Halliburton had divested itself of
both companies by 2000. In the meantime, the companies had done another
$30m-worth of business in Iraq before being sold off.
The Dresser merger was, it appeared, the crowning achievement of the
Cheney years at Halliburton. But Cheney left Halliburton several other
legacies. David Gribbin, Cheney's former chief of staff, became
Halliburton's chief lobbyist in Washington. Admiral Joe Lopez, a former
commander of the sixth fleet, was hired to be KBR's governmental
operations expert. Together, Cheney's team made Halliburton one of the
top
government contractors in the country. KBR had nearly doubled its
government contracts, from $1.2bn in the five years prior to his
arrival,
to $2.3bn during his five years as CEO. Halliburton soared from 73rd to
18th on the Pentagon's list of top contractors.
After 9/11, KBR went to work on the war on terrorism, building the 1,000
detention cells at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for terrorist suspects, at a
cost
of $52m. The work had to feel familiar to KBR: it had done the exact
same
job 35 years earlier in Vietnam. When troops were deployed to
Afghanistan,
so was KBR. It built US bases in Bagram and Kandahar for $157m. As it
had
done in the past, KBR had men on the ground before the first troops even
arrived in most locations. They readied the camps, fed the troops, and
hauled away the waste. And they did it like the military would have done
it: fast, efficient, and effective. It was good work, solid revenues,
but
nothing like the windfall the company had experienced in the Balkans.
In addition, Halliburton won the contract for restoring the Iraqi oil
infrastructure - a contract that was not competitively bid. It was given
to Halliburton out of convenience, because it had developed the plan for
fighting oil fires (all, by this time, extinguished). Despite the new
business, the fortunes of Halliburton and its subsidiary have not
prospered. The stock that Cheney cashed in near its peak, when he
renewed
his political career in 2000, has since plummeted. The main culprit was
the 1998 merger with Dresser, which saddled the company with asbestos
liabilities that ultimately led to two Halliburton subsidiaries - one of
them KBR - having to file for bankruptcy.
When Cheney left to become Bush's running mate, he took a golden
parachute
package - in addition to the stock options he was obliged to sell for
$30m. In September 2003, Cheney insisted: "Since I've left Halliburton
to
become George Bush's vice-president, I've severed all my ties with the
company, gotten rid of all my financial interests. I have no financial
interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't now for over three
years."
The Congressional Research Service (CRS), a non-partisan agency that
investigates political issues at the request of elected officials, says
otherwise. Cheney has been receiving a deferred salary from Halliburton
in
the years since he left the company. In 2001, he received $205,298. In
2002, he drew $162,392. He is scheduled to receive similar payments
through 2005, and has an insurance policy in place to protect the
payments
in the event that Halliburton should fold. In addition, Cheney still
holds
433,333 unexercised stock options in Halliburton. He has agreed to
donate
any profits to charity.
"The Halliburton Agenda" by Dan Briody is published by John Wiley and
Sons Ltd at £16.99. To order a copy for £14.99 plus p&p, call Guardian
Book Service on 0870 836 0875.
Cheney)
Kellogg Brown & Root nei Balcani e' Camp Bondsteel... Bondsteel e' la
piu' vasta e costosa base militare edificata dai tempi del Vietnam.
Essa si trova
sul percorso dell'oleodotto trans-balcanico AMBO (Albanian-Macedonian-
Bulgarian Oil), che unisce la regione del Caspio, ricca di petrolio, al
resto del
mondo... ]
"One example of the work KBR did in the Balkans was Camp Bondsteel...
Bondsteel is the largest and most expensive army base since Vietnam. It
also happens to be built in the path of the
Albanian-Macedonian-Bulgarian
Oil (Ambo) Trans-Balkan pipeline, the pipeline connecting the oil-rich
Caspian
Sea region to the rest of the world..."
Profits of war
Halliburton has become a byword for the cosy links between the White
House
and Texan big business. But how did the company run in the 90s by Dick
Cheney secure a deal that guaranteed it millions in profit every time
the
US military saw action? In this exclusive extract from his new book, Dan
Briody reveals how the firm made a killing on the battleground
Thursday July 22, 2004
The Guardian
On January 12 1991, Congress authorised President George HW Bush to
engage
Iraq in war. Just five days later, Operation Desert Storm commenced in
Kuwait. As with the more recent war in the Gulf, it did not take long
for
the US to claim victory - it was all over by the end of February - but
the
clean-up would last longer, and was far more expensive than the military
action itself. In a senseless act of desperation and defeat, Iraqi
troops
set fire to more than 700 Kuwaiti oil wells, resulting in a constant fog
of thick, black smoke that turned day into night.
It was thought the mess would take no less than five years to clean up,
as
lakes of oil surrounding each well blazed out of control, making it
nearly
impossible to approach the burning wells, let alone extinguish them. But
with the fighting over, Halliburton angled its way into the clean-up and
rebuilding effort that was expected to cost around $200bn (£163bn) over
the next 10 years.
The company sent 60 men to help with the firefighting effort. Meanwhile,
its engineering and construction subsidiary Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR)
won
an additional $3m contract to assess the damage that the invasion had
done
to Kuwait's infrastructure - a contract whose value had multiplied seven
times by the end of KBR's involvement. More significantly still, KBR
won a
contract to extract troops from Saudi Arabia after their services were
no
longer needed in the Gulf. Halliburton was back in the army logistics
business in earnest for the first time since Vietnam. The end of the
Gulf
war saw nothing less than the rebirth of the military outsourcing
business.
Military outsourcing was not new. Private firms had been aiding in war
efforts since long before KBR won its first naval shipbuilding contract.
But the nature of military outsourcing has changed dramatically in the
last decade. The trend towards a "downsized" military began because of
the
"peace dividend" at the end of the cold war, and continued throughout
the
1990s. This combination of a reduced military but continued conflict
gave
rise to an unprecedented new industry of private military firms. These
firms would assist the military in everything from weapons procurement
and
maintenance to training of troops and logistics.
In the decade after the first Gulf war, the number of private
contractors
used in and around the battlefield increased tenfold. It has been
estimated that there is now one private contractor for every 10 soldiers
in Iraq. Companies such as Halliburton, which became the fifth largest
defence contractor in the nation during the 1990s, have played a
critical
role in this trend.
The story behind America's "super contract" begins in 1992, when the
department of defence, then headed by Dick Cheney, was impressed with
the
work Halliburton did during its time in Kuwait. Sensing the need to
bolster its forces in the event of further conflicts of a similar
nature,
the Pentagon asked private contractors to bid on a $3.9m contract to
write
a report on how a private firm could provide logistical support to the
army in the case of further military action.
The report was to examine 13 different "hot spots" around the world, and
detail how services as varied as building bases to feeding the troops
could be accomplished. The contractor that would potentially provide the
services detailed in the report would be required to support the
deployment of 20,000 troops over 180 days. It was a massive contingency
plan, the first of its kind for the American military.
Thirty-seven companies tendered for the contract; KBR won it. The
company
was paid another $5m later that year to extend the plan to other
locations
and add detail.
The KBR report, which remains classified to this day, convinced Cheney
that it was indeed possible to create one umbrella contract and award it
to a single firm. The contract became known as the Logistics Civil
Augmentation Programme (Logcap) and has been called "the mother of all
service contracts". It has been used in every American deployment since
its award in 1992 - at a cost of several billion dollars (and counting).
The lucky recipient of the first, five-year Logcap contract was the very
same company hired to draw up the plan in the first place: KBR.
The Logcap contract pulled KBR out of its late 1980s doldrums and
boosted
the bottom line of Halliburton throughout the 1990s. It is,
effectively, a
blank cheque from the government. The contractor makes its money from a
built-in profit percentage, anywhere from 1% to 9%, depending on various
incentive clauses. When your profit is a percentage of the cost, the
more
you spend, the more you make.
Before the ink was dry on the first Logcap contract, the US army was
deployed to Somalia in December 1992 as part of Operation Restore Hope.
KBR employees were there before the army even arrived, and they were the
last to leave. The firm made $109.7m in Somalia. In August 1994, they
earned $6.3m from Operation Support Hope in Rwanda. In September of that
same year, Operation Uphold Democracy in Haiti netted the company $150m.
And in October 1994, Operation Vigilant Warrior made them another $5m.
In the spirit of "refuse no job", the company was building the base
camps,
supplying the troops with food and water, fuel and munitions, cleaning
latrines, even washing their clothes. They attended the staff meetings
and
were kept up to speed on all the activities related to a given mission.
They were becoming another unit in the US army.
The army's growing dependency on the company hit home when, in 1997, KBR
lost the Logcap contract in a competitive rebid to rival Dyncorp. The
army
found it impossible to remove Brown & Root from their work in the
Balkans
- by far the most lucrative part of the contract - and so carved out the
work in that theatre to keep it with KBR. In 2001, the company won the
Logcap contract again, this time for twice the normal term length: 10
years.
To the uninitiated, the appointment of Cheney to the chairman,
president,
and chief executive officer positions at Halliburton in August 1995,
made
little sense. Cheney had almost no business experience, having been a
career politician and bureaucrat. Financial analysts downgraded the
stock
and the business press openly questioned the decision.
Cheney has been described by those who know him as everything from
low-key
to downright bland, but the confidence he inspired and the loyalty he
professed made him an indispensable part of Donald Rumsfeld's rise to
power. In the 1970s, Rumsfeld became Gerald Ford's White House chief of
staff, with Cheney as his deputy. In those days, Cheney was assigned a
codename by the secret service that perfectly summed up his disposition:
"Backseat".
But Halliburton understood Cheney's value. With him as CEO, the company
gained considerable leverage in Washington. Until Cheney's appointment
in
the autumn of 1995, Halliburton's business results had been decent.
After
a loss of $91m in 1993, the company had returned to profitability in
1994
with an operating profit of $236m. With the new revenue coming in from
Logcap, Halliburton and its prize subsidiary, KBR, were back on track.
Though Logcap was producing only modest revenues, it was successful in
reintegrating KBR into the military machine.
The big opportunity came in December 1995, just two months after Cheney
assumed the post of CEO, when the US sent thousands of troops to the
Balkans as a peace-keeping force. As part of Operation Joint Endeavour,
KBR was dispatched to Bosnia and Kosovo to support the army in its
operations in the region. The task was massive in scope and size.
One example of the work KBR did in the Balkans was Camp Bondsteel. The
camp was so large that the US general accounting office (GAO) likened it
to "a small town". The company built roads, power generation, water and
sewage systems, housing, a helicopter airfield, a perimeter fence, guard
towers, and a detention centre. Bondsteel is the largest and most
expensive army base since Vietnam. It also happens to be built in the
path
of the Albanian-Macedonian-Bulgarian Oil (Ambo) Trans-Balkan pipeline,
the
pipeline connecting the oil-rich Caspian Sea region to the rest of the
world. The initial feasibility project for Ambo was done by KBR.
KBR's cash flow from Logcap ballooned under Cheney's tenure, jumping
from
$144m in 1994 to more than $423m in 1996, and the Balkans was the
driving
force. By 1999, the army was spending just under $1bn a year on KBR's
work
in the Balkans. The GAO issued a report in September 2000 charging
serious
cost-control problems in Bosnia, but KBR retains the contract to this
day.
Meanwhile, Cheney was busy developing Halliburton's business in other
parts of the world. "It is a false dichotomy that we have to choose
between our commercial and other interests," he told the [public policy
research foundation] Cato Institute in 1998, speaking out against
economic
sanctions levied by the Clinton administration against countries
suspected
of terrorist activity. "Our government has become sanctions-happy," he
continued.
In particular, Cheney objected to sanctions against Libya and Iran, two
countries with which Halliburton was already doing business regardless.
Even more disconcerting, though, was the work the company did in Iraq.
Between his stints as secretary of defence and vice-president, Cheney
was
in charge of Halliburton when it was circumventing strict UN sanctions,
helping to rebuild Iraq and enriching Saddam Hussein.
In September 1998, Halliburton closed a $7.7bn stock merger with Dresser
Industries (the company that gave George HW Bush his first job). The
merger made Halliburton the largest oilfield services firm in the world.
It also brought with it two foreign subsidiaries that were doing
business
with Iraq via the controversial Oil for Food programme. The two
subsidiaries, Dresser Rand and Ingersoll Dresser Pump Co, signed
$73m-worth of contracts for oil production equipment.
Cheney told the press during his 2000 run for vice-president that he
had a
"firm policy" against doing business with Iraq. He admitted to doing
business with Iran and Libya, but "Iraq's different," he said. Cheney
told
ABC TV: "We've not done any business in Iraq since UN sanctions were
imposed on Iraq in 1990, and I had a standing policy that I wouldn't do
that."
Three weeks later, Cheney was forced to admit the business ties, but
claimed ignorance. He told reporters that he was not aware of Dresser's
business in Iraq, and that besides, Halliburton had divested itself of
both companies by 2000. In the meantime, the companies had done another
$30m-worth of business in Iraq before being sold off.
The Dresser merger was, it appeared, the crowning achievement of the
Cheney years at Halliburton. But Cheney left Halliburton several other
legacies. David Gribbin, Cheney's former chief of staff, became
Halliburton's chief lobbyist in Washington. Admiral Joe Lopez, a former
commander of the sixth fleet, was hired to be KBR's governmental
operations expert. Together, Cheney's team made Halliburton one of the
top
government contractors in the country. KBR had nearly doubled its
government contracts, from $1.2bn in the five years prior to his
arrival,
to $2.3bn during his five years as CEO. Halliburton soared from 73rd to
18th on the Pentagon's list of top contractors.
After 9/11, KBR went to work on the war on terrorism, building the 1,000
detention cells at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for terrorist suspects, at a
cost
of $52m. The work had to feel familiar to KBR: it had done the exact
same
job 35 years earlier in Vietnam. When troops were deployed to
Afghanistan,
so was KBR. It built US bases in Bagram and Kandahar for $157m. As it
had
done in the past, KBR had men on the ground before the first troops even
arrived in most locations. They readied the camps, fed the troops, and
hauled away the waste. And they did it like the military would have done
it: fast, efficient, and effective. It was good work, solid revenues,
but
nothing like the windfall the company had experienced in the Balkans.
In addition, Halliburton won the contract for restoring the Iraqi oil
infrastructure - a contract that was not competitively bid. It was given
to Halliburton out of convenience, because it had developed the plan for
fighting oil fires (all, by this time, extinguished). Despite the new
business, the fortunes of Halliburton and its subsidiary have not
prospered. The stock that Cheney cashed in near its peak, when he
renewed
his political career in 2000, has since plummeted. The main culprit was
the 1998 merger with Dresser, which saddled the company with asbestos
liabilities that ultimately led to two Halliburton subsidiaries - one of
them KBR - having to file for bankruptcy.
When Cheney left to become Bush's running mate, he took a golden
parachute
package - in addition to the stock options he was obliged to sell for
$30m. In September 2003, Cheney insisted: "Since I've left Halliburton
to
become George Bush's vice-president, I've severed all my ties with the
company, gotten rid of all my financial interests. I have no financial
interest in Halliburton of any kind and haven't now for over three
years."
The Congressional Research Service (CRS), a non-partisan agency that
investigates political issues at the request of elected officials, says
otherwise. Cheney has been receiving a deferred salary from Halliburton
in
the years since he left the company. In 2001, he received $205,298. In
2002, he drew $162,392. He is scheduled to receive similar payments
through 2005, and has an insurance policy in place to protect the
payments
in the event that Halliburton should fold. In addition, Cheney still
holds
433,333 unexercised stock options in Halliburton. He has agreed to
donate
any profits to charity.
"The Halliburton Agenda" by Dan Briody is published by John Wiley and
Sons Ltd at £16.99. To order a copy for £14.99 plus p&p, call Guardian
Book Service on 0870 836 0875.
(english / italiano)
Chi nasconde cosa sull'11 Settembre ? (1)
1. Dov Zakheim e l'11 settembre
2. Feds probe Clinton aide over missing papers: Former national
security adviser under criminal investigation (CNN) / Kerry Adviser
Steps Aside Amid Outcry Over Documents (NYT)
=== 1 ===
Da Comedonchisciotte
http://www.comedonchisciotte.net/
modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1922
----------------
Dov Zakheim e l'11 settembre
Il System Planning Corporation (SPC) progetta, costruisce e distribuisce
tecnologia altamente sofisticata, capace di permettere ad un operatore
il
controllo del volo di aerei in modo remoto, da una postazione terrestre
o
aerea. Per vedere l'aspetto e le caratteristiche dell'hardware:
www.sysplan.com/Radar/CTS.
La SPC commercia inoltre una tecnologia che rende possibile la presa di
comando di un veicolo aereo già in volo. Ad esempio la tecnologia Flight
Termination System (FTS) è capace di "dirottare aerei dirottati" e
costringerli ad atterrare in luoghi sicuri. Il sistema FTS abbinato a
quello
CTS (Command Transmitter System) è capace di controllare il volo anche
di
otto aerei contemporaneamente (vedi www.spyplan.com/Radar/FTS).
La possibilità di un 'uso scellerato' di queste brillanti tecnologie,
sviluppate e impiegate dalla SPC, avrebbe meritato un'attenta
considerazione
nell'ambito di una completa e imparziale indagine sui fatti dell'11
settembre.
In questo contesto è necessario sottolineare che il rabbino Dov Zakheim
è
stato Direttore Generale della Divisione Internazionale della SPC fino
al
giorno che il presidente Bush lo ha nominato Sottosegretario alla
Difesa e
Revisore del Pentagono (Capo dell'Ufficio Finanziario al Pentagono). In
pratica due cariche che lo ponevano come autorità soltanto al di sotto
di
Rumsfeld (colui che ha scritto la politica del The Project for a New
American Century - PNAC) e gli conferivano la facoltà di spostare fondi
all'interno del Pentagono. Da entrambe le cariche si è dimesso il 15
aprile
2004.
Il direttore finanziario del Pentagono lascia il posto dopo aver
supervisionato la vorticosa ascesa del budget per la difesa che ha
raggiunto
nel 2005 la cifra di 450 miliardi di dollari. ZaKheim ha rifiutato di
dire
ai giornalisti l'esatto motivo della sua partenza, affermando solo di
essere
esausto nel controllare centinaia di miliardi di dollari
dell'amministrazione Bush: "Lascio perché sono stati 3 anni di duro
lavoro".
Non molto tempo prima di raggiungere i vertici del Pentagono, Zakheim
fu il
co-autore di un articolo, intitolato "Ricostruire le Difese
dell'America:
Strategia, forze e risorse per un nuovo secolo" che venne pubblicato dal
PNAC nel settembre 2000, esattamente un anno prima dell'11 settembre;
nell'articolo, a pagina 51, si stabilisce che "il processo di
trasformazione, anche se è di portata rivoluzionaria, è probabilmente di
lunga durata, in assenza di un qualche evento catastrofico e
catalizzante -
come fu Pearl Harbour"."Voilà! 9/11" commenta Stephen M. St. John.
Chi è Zakheim?
Conservatore repubblicano, si laurea al College ebraico di Londra nel
1973 e
ottiene il dottorato in economia e politica a Oxford. Già negli anni 70
inizia la sua carriera nell'Ufficio Affari Finanziari del Congresso (ed
esattamente nella Divisione affari internazionali e sicurezza
nazionale). Ex
professore di economia all'università Yeshiva di New York, ha dal 1981
(quando ebbe il primo incarico al Dipartimento della Difesa sotto la
presidenza Reagan) ricoperto vari incarichi al Pentagono, continuando
nello
stesso tempo a lavorare per l'industria privata, esattamente come
consulente
per la McDonnell Douglas e la Boeing.
Durante la campagna presidenziale del governatore Bush del 2000 era
consigliere per la politica estera. In quel periodo, mentre lavora alla
SPC,
si impegna anche in due importanti commissioni, nominate dal Congresso e
guidate da Rumsfeld, prima del suo ritorno al Pentagono, una sulla
proliferazione dei missili balistici e l'altra sull'importanza dello
spazio
negli affari militari. Come risultato del lavoro svolto, Rumsfeld
chiese a
Zakheim di assumere l'incarico di "controllore" dei conti (2001),
sapendo di
mettere all'ufficio finanziario del Pentagono una persona il cui
principale
obiettivo era quello di trasformare l'esercito americano in una forza
capace
di affrontare futuri scontri nelle guerre "asimmetriche" combattute
contro
terroristi e altri elusivi nemici.
Zakheim fu tra i pochi strateghi della difesa degli anni di Reagan e del
primo Bush a non abbandonare Washington durante gli 8 anni della
presidenza
Clinton, rimanendo in città e mantenendosi in contatto con l'ambiente.
Dopo l'attentato dell'11 settembre, "Zakheim si è assunto una nuova
responsabilità, pagando circa 1 miliardo di dollari il giorno per la
guerra
al terrorismo". Da questo momento Zakheim dipinge se stesso come un
"facilitatore", come l'uomo che si preoccupa che a nessuno venga a
mancare
le capacità finanziarie di portare avanti questa guerra su due fronti
che
l'America si trova a combattere. Afferma infatti: "Questa è una guerra
su 2
fronti. E' la nostra prima guerra su due fronti dalla II guerra
mondiale e
la nostra prima guerra interna dalla guerra del 1812. Non ci sono
precedenti
nella nostra memoria. Io non mi preoccupo del sostegno a questa guerra.
Non
per il momento... voglio assicurare a tutti, dal soldato agli alti
comandi,
le risorse necessarie per combattere le guerre della nazione". Secondo
Zakheim, la guerra al terrorismo ha accelerato la possibilità di un
cambiamento all'interno del Pentagono e ha reso più facile per Rumsfeld
spingere "l'agenda della trasformazione" incentrata sulla difesa
missilistica e interna, sul contro-terrorismo, sul dominio spaziale,
sulle
guerre cibernetiche e sui missili spaziali di precisione a lungo raggio.
Dalle sue parole: "Il sistema è un sistema a reazione lenta finché non
accade qualcosa e qualcosa è accaduto. E il sistema ha reagito. Ciò
spingerà
avanti la nostra agenda, ovviamente innestata dagli sforzi per la
guerra,
questo genere di guerra che molti di noi hanno paventato e anticipato".
Alla SPC, fabbrica di Arlington, raddoppiò il salario preso al
Pentagono.
Era l'epoca in cui sfornava prime pagine (e libri) su vari soggetti tra
cui
quelle sul caccia israeliano Lavi e le opzioni di pace "strategicamente
marginali" messe in atto dall'amministrazione Clinton.
Intanto si viene a conoscere che il Pentagono ha perso la traccia di 2,3
migliaia di miliardi: "Secondo alcuni calcoli non siamo capaci di
rintracciare questo denaro attraverso l'analisi delle transazioni"
(frase di
Donald Rumsfeld, riportata su CBS News, 29/1/02).
In pratica questo denaro è scomparso - nessuno sa dove sia finito.
Funzionari governativi hanno accusato il sistema di contabilità e il
dipartimento della difesa americano, dal canto suo, non è stato in
grado di
produrre bilanci controllati in modo indipendente dal 1995.
Uno studio dell'Ente pubblico per il controllo amministrativo e
contabile ha
trovato i sistemi di contabilità di magazzino della Difesa tenuti in
modo
così approssimativo che l'esercito americano risulta aver perso ogni
traccia
di 56 aeroplani, 32 carri e 36 unità di lancio di missili Javelin.
Che sia questo il motivo delle dimissioni?
Uri Dowbenko su Conspiracy Planet esclama: "Il rabbino Zakheim ha
lasciato
il Pentagono. Grazie a Dio". Secondo l'articolista, dopo più di 20 anni
di
comando esercitato su una frode militare del valore di più di 3000
miliardi
di dollari, il Revisore dei conti del Pentagono se ne va e si
trasferisce
alla Booz Allen Hamilton attraverso quel famoso meccanismo della "porta
girevole" che lega governo e compagnie industriali di sostegno. Zakheim
sarebbe responsabile della mala gestione di più di 400 miliardi di
dollari/anno. Zakheim dopo le contestazioni ha affermato che "ci
troviamo
negli affari economici di guerre in corso, non sui libri di bilancio".
Conclude Dowbenfo: "Intanto il rabbino se ne esce di scena lasciando le
finanze del Pentagono con più di 5000 diversi sistemi finanziari in
atto. Se
si fosse trovato a fare quello che ha fatto al Pentagono in una
multinazionale, sarebbe stato accusato di cospirazione criminale,
negligenza
e migliaia di accuse di frode. Il paradosso è che se ne sta andando a
lavorare proprio nel cosiddetto settore privato".
Dal punto di vista delle indagini su un delitto (11/9), 'blueridge' (uno
pseudonimo) nel suo post su libertyforum afferma: "E' l'ora di mettere
il
suo nome tra i principali sospettati ... egli è ovviamente un uomo
dell'autorità sionista (agente Rothchild), con esperienza in controllo
remoto (Direttore della System Planning Corporation - tecnica di
controllo
remoto di velivoli!), sotto solo a Rumsfeld in quanto ad autorità,
scrittore
politico del PNAC e capace di spostare i fondi all'interno del Pentagono
stesso!" Questi sarebbero i sospetti capaci di spiegare "movente, mezzi
e
opportunità... tutti in un solo uomo! Io credo che possa essere la MENTE
DELL'11/9! (E' sorprendente come la stampa non se ne sia mai
adeguatamene
occupata)"
=== 2 ===
Feds probe Clinton aide over missing papers
Former national security adviser under criminal investigation
Tuesday, July 20, 2004 Posted: 7:42 PM EDT (2342 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/20/berger.probe/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former national security adviser Samuel "Sandy"
Berger is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department over
allegations that he took secret documents from the National Archives
while reviewing Clinton administration records for the 9/11 commission.
Sources said that among the documents Berger took were drafts of a
Clinton
administration "after-action" report on efforts to thwart the so-called
"millennium plot," a suspected al Qaeda attack planned around the New
Year's holiday in 1999.
Berger, who was national security adviser during President Clinton's
second
term, said in a statement Monday that the removal of the papers was
unintentional.
He said he returned everything he had after the National Archives told
him
documents were missing, "except for a few documents that apparently I
had
accidentally discarded."
Law enforcement sources said archive staff told FBI agents they saw
Berger
placing items in his jacket and pants, and one archive staffer told
agents
that Berger also placed something in his socks.
That latter allegation drew a sharp response from Berger associate and
former White House lawyer Lanny Davis, who challenged any unnamed
official
who makes such an accusation to come forward publicly.
"I suggest that person is lying," he said. "And if that person has the
guts,
let's see who it is who made the comment that Sandy Berger stuffed
something
into his socks."
Berger was designated as the official from the Clinton administration
who
would review documents relevant to 9/11 commission inquiries into the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. He also was a witness at
commission
hearings and reviewed records to prepare for his personal testimony.
In recent months, he has been serving as an informal foreign policy
adviser
to Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry, but stepped down
from
the unpaid position Tuesday, said his lawyer, Lanny Breuer.
The investigation has been under way since October, and its disclosure
the
week before the Democratic National Convention in Boston, Massachusetts
--
and just days before the 9/11 commission is due to release its report
-- led
some Democrats to question whether the news was leaked for political
reasons.
Kerry's campaign reacted strongly to suggestions by some Republicans
that
Berger might have passed classified information to it.
"This appears to be a partisan attempt to divert attention away from the
9/11 commission report," said Kerry spokesman Phil Singer. "Instead of
using
the report's recommendations to learn how we can improve our homeland
security, Republicans are playing politics with an inquiry."
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota said he found the
timing
"very curious, given this has been under way now for this long."
"Somebody leaked it, obviously, with intent, I think, to do damage to
Mr.
Berger, and I think that's unfortunate," Daschle said.
But an administration source told CNN that any suggestion the Justice
Department leaked the investigation on purpose now is "simply not true."
Bush campaign spokesman Terry Holt said Berger's decision to leave the
Kerry
campaign "was appropriate, but there are still questions that remain."
"There are still a lot of questions about whether or not the Kerry
campaign
benefited from the information Berger took," Holt said.
Rep. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, the Republican speaker of the House,
said
he was "profoundly troubled" by the probe and suggested Berger was
trying to
conceal damaging information from the 9/11 commission.
"What information could be so embarrassing that a man with decades of
experience in handling classified documents would risk being caught
pilfering our nation's most sensitive secrets? Did these documents
detail
simple negligence, or did they contain something more sinister?" Hastert
asked a statement.
Berger regrets 'sloppiness'
One Berger associate said Berger acknowledges placing his handwritten
notes
into his pants pockets, and perhaps into his jacket as well.
National Archives' policy requires that if someone reviews classified
documents and wants to take out handwritten notes, those notes must
first be
cleared by archivists.
"I deeply regret the sloppiness involved, but I had no intention of
withholding documents from the commission, and to the contrary, to my
knowledge, every document requested by the commission from the Clinton
administration was produced," Berger said in a written statement.
A government source said some of the documents at issue were classified
as
"code word" materials -- the highest level of secrecy in the U.S.
government, held more closely than nuclear secrets.
The source said the 9/11 commission was briefed on the Berger
investigation,
but the White House was never informed of the matter.
Archives officials told investigators that at least one draft of the
millennium plot after-action report is still missing.
9/11 panel: Probe won't affect report
But Al Felzenberg, a spokesman for the 9/11 commission, said
commissioners
have no reason to believe the Berger investigation will affect "the
substance or integrity" of its final report, due to be released
Thursday.
The 10-member bipartisan panel, formally known as the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, was established
to investigate the
events before, during and immediately after the attacks of September
11, 2001.
Felzenberg said the panel "believes it had access to all materials
needed to
do our report," and was "reasonably certain" it saw all versions of the
missing after-action memo.
Associates said Berger knew there were copies of the documents and that
former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke, the after-action report's
author, was cooperating with the commission inquiry. They questioned
what
motive Berger would have had to take and destroy documents.
Two sources associated with the investigation said Breuer made a
detailed
statement of Berger's view of the facts at issue several months ago and
has
offered to talk to the Justice Department about a resolution to the
probe.
Breuer has renewed his offer to talk several times since, one of the
Berger
associates said, but said prosecutors have refused to enter into such
discussions.
In the case of the classified documents removed from the archives, the
associate said Berger was reviewing thousands of documents and trying to
"power read" as much as possible -- placing some in a pile to be
forwarded
to the 9/11 commission and others in a "nonresponsive" file to be
returned,
because he did not believe they were relevant to the commission's
requests.
Berger has told associates and his attorneys he deliberately set aside
drafts of the millennium plot after-action report because it was a
longer
document and "he knew he needed to take some time on it," according to
one
adviser.
In Berger's account, after hours of reading documents, he inadvertently
took
the documents he had set aside to read later along with other materials
and
a leather portfolio he had carried into the screening room.
CNN's John King, Kelli Arena, Bob Franken and Pam Benson contributed to
this
report.
---
Kerry Adviser Steps Aside Amid Outcry Over Documents
By DAVID STOUT and MARK GLASSMAN
Published: July 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/20/politics/20CND-
BERG.html?pagewanted=1&hp
WASHINGTON, July 20 — A former national security adviser, Samuel R.
Berger,
quit his role as informal adviser to the presidential campaign of
Senator
John Kerry today amid a clamor over his improper handling of classified
documents.
"Mr. Berger does not want any issue surrounding the 9/11 commission to
be
used for partisan purposes," Lanny Breuer, Mr. Berger's attorney, told
The
Associated Press late this afternoon. "With that in mind he has decided
to
step aside as an informal adviser to the Kerry campaign until this
matter is
resolved."
The decision to step aside came after a day in which Republicans zeroed
in
on the disclosure that Mr. Berger, who was President Bill Clinton's
national
security adviser, removed classified documents from the National
Archives
last year. Some Republicans wondered aloud today whether Mr. Berger had
used the papers to help Senator Kerry, the presumptive Democratic
presidential
nominee.
Mr. Berger's mishandling of the documents, which were related to
terrorism
and which he took from the National Archives in preparation for his
testimony before the 9/11 commission, seemed today to become a bigger
problem for the Kerry campaign almost by the hour — and at the worst
possible time, as Mr. Kerry is hoping to gain a big lift by next week's
Democratic National Convention in Boston.
Mr. Berger, no stranger to the knees and elbows of Washington,
apparently
bowed to the political reality that "if you have to explain it, don't
bother."
Mr. Kerry issued a statement in which he said: "Sandy Berger is my
friend,
and he has tirelessly served this nation with honor and distinction. I
respect his decision to step aside as an adviser to the campaign until
this
matter is resolved objectively and fairly."
While Democrats had seemed inclined to give Mr. Berger the benefit of
the
doubt and accept his explanation that the incident with the documents
was
inadvertent, Republicans were decidedly less charitable.
The Republican majority leader, Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, told
reporters in the Capitol he did not know whether the classified
documents
that Mr. Berger took had been sent to the Kerry campaign. "But I think
it's
pretty interesting that the press is now reporting that these documents
had
to do with airport security and seaport security, and that those are two
areas where the Kerry campaign has seemed to focus on relative to
alleged
deficiencies in homeland security," Mr. Frist said.
Mr. Berger was not immediately available for comment on the Republican
remarks. However, he said Monday night that the documents had been taken
inadvertently. And the Kerry campaign said today it was drawing up a
statement rebutting the assertions.
Senator Gordon Smith, Republican of Oregon, called on the Kerry
campaign to
"immediately disavow any connection with Sandy Berger" and turn over any
documents supplied by Mr. Berger.
"Right after the documents were taken, John Kerry held a photo op and
attacked the president on port security," Mr. Smith recalled. "The
documents
that were taken may have been utilized for that press conference."
A moment later, Mr. Smith said: "I just simply think it's important for
the
American people to know how disappointing this conduct is as they try to
take down the president of the United States. The American people
deserve
better than this. And frankly, we expect more than this."
It was disclosed on Monday night that Mr. Berger removed classified
national
security documents from the National Archives while vetting them in
preparation for testimony before the commission investigating the
terrorist
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Mr. Berger inadvertently removed at least two slightly different
versions of
a memo critiquing how the government handled national intelligence and
security issues before the millennium celebration in December 1999, as
well
as personal notes he had taken on classified documents, Mr. Breuer said
Monday night.
"In the course of reviewing over several days thousands of pages of
documents on behalf of the Clinton administration in connection with
requests by the 9/11 Commission, I inadvertently took a few documents
from
the Archives," Mr. Berger himself said in a statement Monday. "I also
took
my notes on the documents reviewed. When I was informed by the Archives
there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had,
except for a few documents that apparently I had accidentally
discarded."
Mr. Berger is the subject of a Justice Department criminal
investigation,
not the target of one. The distinction is crucial. A subject is a person
whose activities are of interest to investigators; a target is a person
who
might be charged with actual wrongdoing.
The affair took on a slightly comic note today, as Republican senators
said
Mr. Berger had apparently put some papers in his trousers.
"Now, I don't know what happened to these documents after they were put
in
Mr. Berger's pants," Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia said today.
"It's
been reported in the press that these documents related to homeland
security
at our airports and at our seaports. And it's very interesting to note
that
those are two areas where Senator Kerry has been very critical of our
Homeland Security Department."
Deputy Attorney General James Comey declined comment on the
investigation
today. But he did say prosecutors take "very, very seriously" any
possible
mishandling of classified documents, The A.P. said.
Mr. Berger said Monday he deeply regretted "the sloppiness involved" and
that he did not intend to keep any document from the commission. The
investigation and Mr. Berger's statement were first reported by The
Associated Press. All of the documents and notes were returned by Mr.
Berger
to the archives in early October, within a week of his learning they
were
missing, his lawyers said.
Despite Mr. Berger's insistence that his mishandling of the documents
was
accidental, the potential for political repercussions quickly became
obvious, in part because Mr. Berger has been an adviser to Senator
Kerry,
President's Bush's presumptive Democrat opponent. Then, too, the
disclosure
that the documents were mishandled comes just before the Sept. 11
commission is to release its long-awaited report. A spokesman for the
commission, Al Felzenberg, told The Associated Press today that Mr.
Berger's
actions would have no effect on the work of the panel, which Mr.
Felzenberg
said had had access to all the materials it needed.
Senator Trent Lott, a Mississippi Republican and member of the Senate
Intelligence Committee, said people should not rush to judgment about
Mr.
Berger's actions. "I think we need more information," he said today on
Fox
News. "I mean, obviously the timing of it is not good if he is serving
as an
adviser to a presidential candidate. But from now on until the election,
everything like this will have a spotlight put on it and examined very
carefully."
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, said he was
surprised.
"I know Sandy Berger well," Mr. Lieberman said on the same Fox News
program.
"He's a very patriotic American. Unless we learn otherwise, I have to
assume
that what Sandy says is right, that any removal of documents was
inadvertent."
Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic leader, told
reporters
at the Capitol that Mr. Berger had served his country "very ably and
very,
very well" and deserved the benefit of the doubt. The senator said
someone
had obviously leaked the fact of the investigation to embarrass Mr.
Berger.
"The timing of all this is curious," Mr. Daschle said.
And David R. Gergen, the longtime political strategist who worked in the
administration of President Bill Clinton as well as in the Nixon, Ford
and
Reagan White Houses, said he thought what Mr. Berger did was "more
innocent
than it looks."
"I have known Sandy Berger for a long time," Mr. Gergen said on NBC's
"Today" show. "He would never do anything to compromise the security of
the
United States." Mr. Gergen said he thought it "suspicious" that word of
the
investigation of Mr. Berger came out just before release of the 9/11
commission report.
Federal agents investigated the allegations that Mr. Berger mishandled
classified materials, a senior government official said Monday evening
. The
official said that the inquiry had concluded and was now being reviewed
by
prosecutors at the Justice Department who will decide whether any laws
were
broken.
Federal law makes it a crime to mishandle classified information,
either by
copying it or removing it from a government-approved secure room, even
if
the information does not fall into the wrong hands. Even so, prosecutors
have in the past exercised wide latitude in cases in which former
officials,
including cabinet officers, would be treated under the law.
Earlier this year, Paul O'Neill, the former Treasury Secretary, was
found to
have used classified material from his tenure in writing a book about
the
Bush economic team. An internal inquiry found that Treasury Department
officials had improperly turned over documents that should have been
classified but that Mr. O'Neill did nothing wrong.
Before that, Johh Deutch, a former C.I.A. director, became the subject
of an
embarrassing inquiry into whether he had downloaded classified
intelligence
documents to an unsecured personal computer that he used to gain access
to
Internet sites. On his final day in office, President Clinton pardoned
Mr.
Deutch, who was in the midst of negotiating a plea agreement with
prosecutors on charges stemming from the accusations.
Chi nasconde cosa sull'11 Settembre ? (1)
1. Dov Zakheim e l'11 settembre
2. Feds probe Clinton aide over missing papers: Former national
security adviser under criminal investigation (CNN) / Kerry Adviser
Steps Aside Amid Outcry Over Documents (NYT)
=== 1 ===
Da Comedonchisciotte
http://www.comedonchisciotte.net/
modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=1922
----------------
Dov Zakheim e l'11 settembre
Il System Planning Corporation (SPC) progetta, costruisce e distribuisce
tecnologia altamente sofisticata, capace di permettere ad un operatore
il
controllo del volo di aerei in modo remoto, da una postazione terrestre
o
aerea. Per vedere l'aspetto e le caratteristiche dell'hardware:
www.sysplan.com/Radar/CTS.
La SPC commercia inoltre una tecnologia che rende possibile la presa di
comando di un veicolo aereo già in volo. Ad esempio la tecnologia Flight
Termination System (FTS) è capace di "dirottare aerei dirottati" e
costringerli ad atterrare in luoghi sicuri. Il sistema FTS abbinato a
quello
CTS (Command Transmitter System) è capace di controllare il volo anche
di
otto aerei contemporaneamente (vedi www.spyplan.com/Radar/FTS).
La possibilità di un 'uso scellerato' di queste brillanti tecnologie,
sviluppate e impiegate dalla SPC, avrebbe meritato un'attenta
considerazione
nell'ambito di una completa e imparziale indagine sui fatti dell'11
settembre.
In questo contesto è necessario sottolineare che il rabbino Dov Zakheim
è
stato Direttore Generale della Divisione Internazionale della SPC fino
al
giorno che il presidente Bush lo ha nominato Sottosegretario alla
Difesa e
Revisore del Pentagono (Capo dell'Ufficio Finanziario al Pentagono). In
pratica due cariche che lo ponevano come autorità soltanto al di sotto
di
Rumsfeld (colui che ha scritto la politica del The Project for a New
American Century - PNAC) e gli conferivano la facoltà di spostare fondi
all'interno del Pentagono. Da entrambe le cariche si è dimesso il 15
aprile
2004.
Il direttore finanziario del Pentagono lascia il posto dopo aver
supervisionato la vorticosa ascesa del budget per la difesa che ha
raggiunto
nel 2005 la cifra di 450 miliardi di dollari. ZaKheim ha rifiutato di
dire
ai giornalisti l'esatto motivo della sua partenza, affermando solo di
essere
esausto nel controllare centinaia di miliardi di dollari
dell'amministrazione Bush: "Lascio perché sono stati 3 anni di duro
lavoro".
Non molto tempo prima di raggiungere i vertici del Pentagono, Zakheim
fu il
co-autore di un articolo, intitolato "Ricostruire le Difese
dell'America:
Strategia, forze e risorse per un nuovo secolo" che venne pubblicato dal
PNAC nel settembre 2000, esattamente un anno prima dell'11 settembre;
nell'articolo, a pagina 51, si stabilisce che "il processo di
trasformazione, anche se è di portata rivoluzionaria, è probabilmente di
lunga durata, in assenza di un qualche evento catastrofico e
catalizzante -
come fu Pearl Harbour"."Voilà! 9/11" commenta Stephen M. St. John.
Chi è Zakheim?
Conservatore repubblicano, si laurea al College ebraico di Londra nel
1973 e
ottiene il dottorato in economia e politica a Oxford. Già negli anni 70
inizia la sua carriera nell'Ufficio Affari Finanziari del Congresso (ed
esattamente nella Divisione affari internazionali e sicurezza
nazionale). Ex
professore di economia all'università Yeshiva di New York, ha dal 1981
(quando ebbe il primo incarico al Dipartimento della Difesa sotto la
presidenza Reagan) ricoperto vari incarichi al Pentagono, continuando
nello
stesso tempo a lavorare per l'industria privata, esattamente come
consulente
per la McDonnell Douglas e la Boeing.
Durante la campagna presidenziale del governatore Bush del 2000 era
consigliere per la politica estera. In quel periodo, mentre lavora alla
SPC,
si impegna anche in due importanti commissioni, nominate dal Congresso e
guidate da Rumsfeld, prima del suo ritorno al Pentagono, una sulla
proliferazione dei missili balistici e l'altra sull'importanza dello
spazio
negli affari militari. Come risultato del lavoro svolto, Rumsfeld
chiese a
Zakheim di assumere l'incarico di "controllore" dei conti (2001),
sapendo di
mettere all'ufficio finanziario del Pentagono una persona il cui
principale
obiettivo era quello di trasformare l'esercito americano in una forza
capace
di affrontare futuri scontri nelle guerre "asimmetriche" combattute
contro
terroristi e altri elusivi nemici.
Zakheim fu tra i pochi strateghi della difesa degli anni di Reagan e del
primo Bush a non abbandonare Washington durante gli 8 anni della
presidenza
Clinton, rimanendo in città e mantenendosi in contatto con l'ambiente.
Dopo l'attentato dell'11 settembre, "Zakheim si è assunto una nuova
responsabilità, pagando circa 1 miliardo di dollari il giorno per la
guerra
al terrorismo". Da questo momento Zakheim dipinge se stesso come un
"facilitatore", come l'uomo che si preoccupa che a nessuno venga a
mancare
le capacità finanziarie di portare avanti questa guerra su due fronti
che
l'America si trova a combattere. Afferma infatti: "Questa è una guerra
su 2
fronti. E' la nostra prima guerra su due fronti dalla II guerra
mondiale e
la nostra prima guerra interna dalla guerra del 1812. Non ci sono
precedenti
nella nostra memoria. Io non mi preoccupo del sostegno a questa guerra.
Non
per il momento... voglio assicurare a tutti, dal soldato agli alti
comandi,
le risorse necessarie per combattere le guerre della nazione". Secondo
Zakheim, la guerra al terrorismo ha accelerato la possibilità di un
cambiamento all'interno del Pentagono e ha reso più facile per Rumsfeld
spingere "l'agenda della trasformazione" incentrata sulla difesa
missilistica e interna, sul contro-terrorismo, sul dominio spaziale,
sulle
guerre cibernetiche e sui missili spaziali di precisione a lungo raggio.
Dalle sue parole: "Il sistema è un sistema a reazione lenta finché non
accade qualcosa e qualcosa è accaduto. E il sistema ha reagito. Ciò
spingerà
avanti la nostra agenda, ovviamente innestata dagli sforzi per la
guerra,
questo genere di guerra che molti di noi hanno paventato e anticipato".
Alla SPC, fabbrica di Arlington, raddoppiò il salario preso al
Pentagono.
Era l'epoca in cui sfornava prime pagine (e libri) su vari soggetti tra
cui
quelle sul caccia israeliano Lavi e le opzioni di pace "strategicamente
marginali" messe in atto dall'amministrazione Clinton.
Intanto si viene a conoscere che il Pentagono ha perso la traccia di 2,3
migliaia di miliardi: "Secondo alcuni calcoli non siamo capaci di
rintracciare questo denaro attraverso l'analisi delle transazioni"
(frase di
Donald Rumsfeld, riportata su CBS News, 29/1/02).
In pratica questo denaro è scomparso - nessuno sa dove sia finito.
Funzionari governativi hanno accusato il sistema di contabilità e il
dipartimento della difesa americano, dal canto suo, non è stato in
grado di
produrre bilanci controllati in modo indipendente dal 1995.
Uno studio dell'Ente pubblico per il controllo amministrativo e
contabile ha
trovato i sistemi di contabilità di magazzino della Difesa tenuti in
modo
così approssimativo che l'esercito americano risulta aver perso ogni
traccia
di 56 aeroplani, 32 carri e 36 unità di lancio di missili Javelin.
Che sia questo il motivo delle dimissioni?
Uri Dowbenko su Conspiracy Planet esclama: "Il rabbino Zakheim ha
lasciato
il Pentagono. Grazie a Dio". Secondo l'articolista, dopo più di 20 anni
di
comando esercitato su una frode militare del valore di più di 3000
miliardi
di dollari, il Revisore dei conti del Pentagono se ne va e si
trasferisce
alla Booz Allen Hamilton attraverso quel famoso meccanismo della "porta
girevole" che lega governo e compagnie industriali di sostegno. Zakheim
sarebbe responsabile della mala gestione di più di 400 miliardi di
dollari/anno. Zakheim dopo le contestazioni ha affermato che "ci
troviamo
negli affari economici di guerre in corso, non sui libri di bilancio".
Conclude Dowbenfo: "Intanto il rabbino se ne esce di scena lasciando le
finanze del Pentagono con più di 5000 diversi sistemi finanziari in
atto. Se
si fosse trovato a fare quello che ha fatto al Pentagono in una
multinazionale, sarebbe stato accusato di cospirazione criminale,
negligenza
e migliaia di accuse di frode. Il paradosso è che se ne sta andando a
lavorare proprio nel cosiddetto settore privato".
Dal punto di vista delle indagini su un delitto (11/9), 'blueridge' (uno
pseudonimo) nel suo post su libertyforum afferma: "E' l'ora di mettere
il
suo nome tra i principali sospettati ... egli è ovviamente un uomo
dell'autorità sionista (agente Rothchild), con esperienza in controllo
remoto (Direttore della System Planning Corporation - tecnica di
controllo
remoto di velivoli!), sotto solo a Rumsfeld in quanto ad autorità,
scrittore
politico del PNAC e capace di spostare i fondi all'interno del Pentagono
stesso!" Questi sarebbero i sospetti capaci di spiegare "movente, mezzi
e
opportunità... tutti in un solo uomo! Io credo che possa essere la MENTE
DELL'11/9! (E' sorprendente come la stampa non se ne sia mai
adeguatamene
occupata)"
=== 2 ===
Feds probe Clinton aide over missing papers
Former national security adviser under criminal investigation
Tuesday, July 20, 2004 Posted: 7:42 PM EDT (2342 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/07/20/berger.probe/index.html
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former national security adviser Samuel "Sandy"
Berger is under criminal investigation by the Justice Department over
allegations that he took secret documents from the National Archives
while reviewing Clinton administration records for the 9/11 commission.
Sources said that among the documents Berger took were drafts of a
Clinton
administration "after-action" report on efforts to thwart the so-called
"millennium plot," a suspected al Qaeda attack planned around the New
Year's holiday in 1999.
Berger, who was national security adviser during President Clinton's
second
term, said in a statement Monday that the removal of the papers was
unintentional.
He said he returned everything he had after the National Archives told
him
documents were missing, "except for a few documents that apparently I
had
accidentally discarded."
Law enforcement sources said archive staff told FBI agents they saw
Berger
placing items in his jacket and pants, and one archive staffer told
agents
that Berger also placed something in his socks.
That latter allegation drew a sharp response from Berger associate and
former White House lawyer Lanny Davis, who challenged any unnamed
official
who makes such an accusation to come forward publicly.
"I suggest that person is lying," he said. "And if that person has the
guts,
let's see who it is who made the comment that Sandy Berger stuffed
something
into his socks."
Berger was designated as the official from the Clinton administration
who
would review documents relevant to 9/11 commission inquiries into the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. He also was a witness at
commission
hearings and reviewed records to prepare for his personal testimony.
In recent months, he has been serving as an informal foreign policy
adviser
to Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry, but stepped down
from
the unpaid position Tuesday, said his lawyer, Lanny Breuer.
The investigation has been under way since October, and its disclosure
the
week before the Democratic National Convention in Boston, Massachusetts
--
and just days before the 9/11 commission is due to release its report
-- led
some Democrats to question whether the news was leaked for political
reasons.
Kerry's campaign reacted strongly to suggestions by some Republicans
that
Berger might have passed classified information to it.
"This appears to be a partisan attempt to divert attention away from the
9/11 commission report," said Kerry spokesman Phil Singer. "Instead of
using
the report's recommendations to learn how we can improve our homeland
security, Republicans are playing politics with an inquiry."
Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota said he found the
timing
"very curious, given this has been under way now for this long."
"Somebody leaked it, obviously, with intent, I think, to do damage to
Mr.
Berger, and I think that's unfortunate," Daschle said.
But an administration source told CNN that any suggestion the Justice
Department leaked the investigation on purpose now is "simply not true."
Bush campaign spokesman Terry Holt said Berger's decision to leave the
Kerry
campaign "was appropriate, but there are still questions that remain."
"There are still a lot of questions about whether or not the Kerry
campaign
benefited from the information Berger took," Holt said.
Rep. Dennis Hastert of Illinois, the Republican speaker of the House,
said
he was "profoundly troubled" by the probe and suggested Berger was
trying to
conceal damaging information from the 9/11 commission.
"What information could be so embarrassing that a man with decades of
experience in handling classified documents would risk being caught
pilfering our nation's most sensitive secrets? Did these documents
detail
simple negligence, or did they contain something more sinister?" Hastert
asked a statement.
Berger regrets 'sloppiness'
One Berger associate said Berger acknowledges placing his handwritten
notes
into his pants pockets, and perhaps into his jacket as well.
National Archives' policy requires that if someone reviews classified
documents and wants to take out handwritten notes, those notes must
first be
cleared by archivists.
"I deeply regret the sloppiness involved, but I had no intention of
withholding documents from the commission, and to the contrary, to my
knowledge, every document requested by the commission from the Clinton
administration was produced," Berger said in a written statement.
A government source said some of the documents at issue were classified
as
"code word" materials -- the highest level of secrecy in the U.S.
government, held more closely than nuclear secrets.
The source said the 9/11 commission was briefed on the Berger
investigation,
but the White House was never informed of the matter.
Archives officials told investigators that at least one draft of the
millennium plot after-action report is still missing.
9/11 panel: Probe won't affect report
But Al Felzenberg, a spokesman for the 9/11 commission, said
commissioners
have no reason to believe the Berger investigation will affect "the
substance or integrity" of its final report, due to be released
Thursday.
The 10-member bipartisan panel, formally known as the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, was established
to investigate the
events before, during and immediately after the attacks of September
11, 2001.
Felzenberg said the panel "believes it had access to all materials
needed to
do our report," and was "reasonably certain" it saw all versions of the
missing after-action memo.
Associates said Berger knew there were copies of the documents and that
former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke, the after-action report's
author, was cooperating with the commission inquiry. They questioned
what
motive Berger would have had to take and destroy documents.
Two sources associated with the investigation said Breuer made a
detailed
statement of Berger's view of the facts at issue several months ago and
has
offered to talk to the Justice Department about a resolution to the
probe.
Breuer has renewed his offer to talk several times since, one of the
Berger
associates said, but said prosecutors have refused to enter into such
discussions.
In the case of the classified documents removed from the archives, the
associate said Berger was reviewing thousands of documents and trying to
"power read" as much as possible -- placing some in a pile to be
forwarded
to the 9/11 commission and others in a "nonresponsive" file to be
returned,
because he did not believe they were relevant to the commission's
requests.
Berger has told associates and his attorneys he deliberately set aside
drafts of the millennium plot after-action report because it was a
longer
document and "he knew he needed to take some time on it," according to
one
adviser.
In Berger's account, after hours of reading documents, he inadvertently
took
the documents he had set aside to read later along with other materials
and
a leather portfolio he had carried into the screening room.
CNN's John King, Kelli Arena, Bob Franken and Pam Benson contributed to
this
report.
---
Kerry Adviser Steps Aside Amid Outcry Over Documents
By DAVID STOUT and MARK GLASSMAN
Published: July 20, 2004
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/20/politics/20CND-
BERG.html?pagewanted=1&hp
WASHINGTON, July 20 — A former national security adviser, Samuel R.
Berger,
quit his role as informal adviser to the presidential campaign of
Senator
John Kerry today amid a clamor over his improper handling of classified
documents.
"Mr. Berger does not want any issue surrounding the 9/11 commission to
be
used for partisan purposes," Lanny Breuer, Mr. Berger's attorney, told
The
Associated Press late this afternoon. "With that in mind he has decided
to
step aside as an informal adviser to the Kerry campaign until this
matter is
resolved."
The decision to step aside came after a day in which Republicans zeroed
in
on the disclosure that Mr. Berger, who was President Bill Clinton's
national
security adviser, removed classified documents from the National
Archives
last year. Some Republicans wondered aloud today whether Mr. Berger had
used the papers to help Senator Kerry, the presumptive Democratic
presidential
nominee.
Mr. Berger's mishandling of the documents, which were related to
terrorism
and which he took from the National Archives in preparation for his
testimony before the 9/11 commission, seemed today to become a bigger
problem for the Kerry campaign almost by the hour — and at the worst
possible time, as Mr. Kerry is hoping to gain a big lift by next week's
Democratic National Convention in Boston.
Mr. Berger, no stranger to the knees and elbows of Washington,
apparently
bowed to the political reality that "if you have to explain it, don't
bother."
Mr. Kerry issued a statement in which he said: "Sandy Berger is my
friend,
and he has tirelessly served this nation with honor and distinction. I
respect his decision to step aside as an adviser to the campaign until
this
matter is resolved objectively and fairly."
While Democrats had seemed inclined to give Mr. Berger the benefit of
the
doubt and accept his explanation that the incident with the documents
was
inadvertent, Republicans were decidedly less charitable.
The Republican majority leader, Senator Bill Frist of Tennessee, told
reporters in the Capitol he did not know whether the classified
documents
that Mr. Berger took had been sent to the Kerry campaign. "But I think
it's
pretty interesting that the press is now reporting that these documents
had
to do with airport security and seaport security, and that those are two
areas where the Kerry campaign has seemed to focus on relative to
alleged
deficiencies in homeland security," Mr. Frist said.
Mr. Berger was not immediately available for comment on the Republican
remarks. However, he said Monday night that the documents had been taken
inadvertently. And the Kerry campaign said today it was drawing up a
statement rebutting the assertions.
Senator Gordon Smith, Republican of Oregon, called on the Kerry
campaign to
"immediately disavow any connection with Sandy Berger" and turn over any
documents supplied by Mr. Berger.
"Right after the documents were taken, John Kerry held a photo op and
attacked the president on port security," Mr. Smith recalled. "The
documents
that were taken may have been utilized for that press conference."
A moment later, Mr. Smith said: "I just simply think it's important for
the
American people to know how disappointing this conduct is as they try to
take down the president of the United States. The American people
deserve
better than this. And frankly, we expect more than this."
It was disclosed on Monday night that Mr. Berger removed classified
national
security documents from the National Archives while vetting them in
preparation for testimony before the commission investigating the
terrorist
attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
Mr. Berger inadvertently removed at least two slightly different
versions of
a memo critiquing how the government handled national intelligence and
security issues before the millennium celebration in December 1999, as
well
as personal notes he had taken on classified documents, Mr. Breuer said
Monday night.
"In the course of reviewing over several days thousands of pages of
documents on behalf of the Clinton administration in connection with
requests by the 9/11 Commission, I inadvertently took a few documents
from
the Archives," Mr. Berger himself said in a statement Monday. "I also
took
my notes on the documents reviewed. When I was informed by the Archives
there were documents missing, I immediately returned everything I had,
except for a few documents that apparently I had accidentally
discarded."
Mr. Berger is the subject of a Justice Department criminal
investigation,
not the target of one. The distinction is crucial. A subject is a person
whose activities are of interest to investigators; a target is a person
who
might be charged with actual wrongdoing.
The affair took on a slightly comic note today, as Republican senators
said
Mr. Berger had apparently put some papers in his trousers.
"Now, I don't know what happened to these documents after they were put
in
Mr. Berger's pants," Senator Saxby Chambliss of Georgia said today.
"It's
been reported in the press that these documents related to homeland
security
at our airports and at our seaports. And it's very interesting to note
that
those are two areas where Senator Kerry has been very critical of our
Homeland Security Department."
Deputy Attorney General James Comey declined comment on the
investigation
today. But he did say prosecutors take "very, very seriously" any
possible
mishandling of classified documents, The A.P. said.
Mr. Berger said Monday he deeply regretted "the sloppiness involved" and
that he did not intend to keep any document from the commission. The
investigation and Mr. Berger's statement were first reported by The
Associated Press. All of the documents and notes were returned by Mr.
Berger
to the archives in early October, within a week of his learning they
were
missing, his lawyers said.
Despite Mr. Berger's insistence that his mishandling of the documents
was
accidental, the potential for political repercussions quickly became
obvious, in part because Mr. Berger has been an adviser to Senator
Kerry,
President's Bush's presumptive Democrat opponent. Then, too, the
disclosure
that the documents were mishandled comes just before the Sept. 11
commission is to release its long-awaited report. A spokesman for the
commission, Al Felzenberg, told The Associated Press today that Mr.
Berger's
actions would have no effect on the work of the panel, which Mr.
Felzenberg
said had had access to all the materials it needed.
Senator Trent Lott, a Mississippi Republican and member of the Senate
Intelligence Committee, said people should not rush to judgment about
Mr.
Berger's actions. "I think we need more information," he said today on
Fox
News. "I mean, obviously the timing of it is not good if he is serving
as an
adviser to a presidential candidate. But from now on until the election,
everything like this will have a spotlight put on it and examined very
carefully."
Senator Joseph I. Lieberman, Democrat of Connecticut, said he was
surprised.
"I know Sandy Berger well," Mr. Lieberman said on the same Fox News
program.
"He's a very patriotic American. Unless we learn otherwise, I have to
assume
that what Sandy says is right, that any removal of documents was
inadvertent."
Senator Tom Daschle of South Dakota, the Democratic leader, told
reporters
at the Capitol that Mr. Berger had served his country "very ably and
very,
very well" and deserved the benefit of the doubt. The senator said
someone
had obviously leaked the fact of the investigation to embarrass Mr.
Berger.
"The timing of all this is curious," Mr. Daschle said.
And David R. Gergen, the longtime political strategist who worked in the
administration of President Bill Clinton as well as in the Nixon, Ford
and
Reagan White Houses, said he thought what Mr. Berger did was "more
innocent
than it looks."
"I have known Sandy Berger for a long time," Mr. Gergen said on NBC's
"Today" show. "He would never do anything to compromise the security of
the
United States." Mr. Gergen said he thought it "suspicious" that word of
the
investigation of Mr. Berger came out just before release of the 9/11
commission report.
Federal agents investigated the allegations that Mr. Berger mishandled
classified materials, a senior government official said Monday evening
. The
official said that the inquiry had concluded and was now being reviewed
by
prosecutors at the Justice Department who will decide whether any laws
were
broken.
Federal law makes it a crime to mishandle classified information,
either by
copying it or removing it from a government-approved secure room, even
if
the information does not fall into the wrong hands. Even so, prosecutors
have in the past exercised wide latitude in cases in which former
officials,
including cabinet officers, would be treated under the law.
Earlier this year, Paul O'Neill, the former Treasury Secretary, was
found to
have used classified material from his tenure in writing a book about
the
Bush economic team. An internal inquiry found that Treasury Department
officials had improperly turned over documents that should have been
classified but that Mr. O'Neill did nothing wrong.
Before that, Johh Deutch, a former C.I.A. director, became the subject
of an
embarrassing inquiry into whether he had downloaded classified
intelligence
documents to an unsecured personal computer that he used to gain access
to
Internet sites. On his final day in office, President Clinton pardoned
Mr.
Deutch, who was in the midst of negotiating a plea agreement with
prosecutors on charges stemming from the accusations.
http://auth.unimondo.org/cfdocs/obportal/
index.cfm?fuseaction=news.notizia&NewsID=3249
Serbi del Kossovo: aspettando la ricostruzione
Nel marzo scorso estremisti albanesi avevano bruciato le loro case. Il
governo kossovaro aveva promesso una rapida ricostruzione ma molti
serbi del Kossovo stanno ancora aspettando. Un articolo tratto da IWPR.
(15/07/2004)
Di Tanja Vujisic – IWPR
Traduzione a cura dell'Osservatorio sui Balcani
Stana Nikolic, 73 anni, sta cercando di trovare qualche oggetto della
propria famiglia nel cortile della casa distrutta dal fuoco, dove
viveva fino al 17 marzo di quest’anno.
Quel giorno estremisti albanesi diedero fuoco a tutte le case serbe
nel villaggio di Svinjare, 4 chilometri a sud della città divisa di
Mitrovica.
La casa di Stana non è ancora stata ricostruita e lei non sa quando
potrà farvi ritorno. Delle 134 case incendiate nel villaggio, solo 30
sono sottoposte a ristrutturazione. La sua non è tra queste.
I pochi fortunati sono stati selezionati dal Comitato per la
ricostruzione, istituito dal governo del Kossovo e con a capo il
Ministro della cultura e dello sport Bexhet Brajshori. Il programma
prevede di riparare le case meno danneggiate e di lasciare per ultime
quelle che sono state completamente distrutte.
Sta diventando sempre più chiaro che la promessa del governo di
ricostruire le case distrutte ed incendiate non sarà adempiuta entro il
termine di settembre, a causa soprattutto degli errori fatti nella
valutazione dei fondi necessari.
I ritardi nel programma di ricostruzione a Svinjare si aggiungeranno
al problema più ampio del ritorno dei serbi espulsi alle loro case in
Kossovo.
La maggior parte dei serbi non vogliono fare ritorno individualmente
ai luoghi che hanno abbandonato in marzo, affermano che ritorneranno
solo in gruppo, quando tutte le loro case saranno ricostruite.
L’ultima ondata di violenza in Kossovo, secondo i dati della missione
in Kossovo delle Nazioni Unite, l’UNMIK, ha avuto come conseguenza la
parziale o completa distruzione di circa 843 case e 30 chiese,
lasciando senza casa circa 4.000 persone tra serbi, Rom ed altri non
albanesi.
In aprile il governo kossovaro ha destinato 5 milioni di euro alla
ricostruzione delle case ma in seguito ha raggiunto la somma di 12
milioni di euro.
Si teme ora che anche questa somma più elevata non sarà sufficiente,
ed il governo ed i singoli comuni stanno cercando di procurarsi più
soldi per la ricostruzione.
Mimoza Kusari, portavoce del governo kossovaro, ha riportato ad IWPR
che il governo sta prendendo in considerazione la possibilità, a causa
della grande somma di denaro che sarà necessaria, di organizzare una
conferenza di finanziatori. Ha detto che alcuni comuni hanno già
iniziato a raccogliere per conto loro fondi aggiuntivi, imponendo sovra
imposte sulla registrazione delle automobili.
Durante una visita in kossovo il 7 giugno scorso, l’Alto
Rappresentante per la politica estera dell’Unione Europea, Javier
Solana, ha affermato che l’Unione Europea potrebbe imporre delle
sanzioni se la ricostruzione non venisse terminata per settembre.
“Il discorso sulla ricostruzione non sta andando correttamente” ha
affermato a Pristina “l’inverno è molto vicino, e se per allora le case
non saranno riparate, rischiano di non esserlo mai – e non possiamo
tollerarlo”.
Il 22 giugno, il primo ministro del kossovo, Bajram Rexhepi, ha
fissato una data più avanzata affermando alla radio Free Europe che
prevede che i lavori terminino per la fine di ottobre o ai primi di
novembre.
Peggy Hicks, direttore dell’ufficio per i rimpatri dell’UNMIK, ha
affermato che dubitava che i lavori venissero completati entro la prima
scadenza data dall’UE, “non penso che saranno completati per il primo
settembre, ma le persone potranno vivere nei cortili delle proprie
case, in containers e tende, sino a che le loro case non saranno
terminate.”
Ha aggiunto, “è molto importante fare tutto il possibile per quella
data per guadagnare la fiducia delle persone a cui stiamo riparando le
case.”
I serbi a Obilic, una piccola città dalla quale furono scacciati in
marzo, hanno ricevuto delle case container come dono da parte del
contingente norvegese della KFOR. A Obilic, 108 dei 415 serbi che
vivevano lì fino a marzo hanno fatto ritorno per vivere nei containers.
Sono stati portati containers anche a Svinare come regalo della
Russia, sebbene alcuni siano stati prontamente rubati. Cinque sono
scomparsi due settimane dopo la loro consegna, e sebbene la KFOR e la
polizia delle Nazioni Unite hanno affermato di aver notato il sinistro,
hanno affermato ad IWPR di non essere responsabili della sorveglianza
di tali oggetti.
A parte le case incendiate, non è stata ancora completata una stima
del danno compiuto alle chiese ed ai monasteri serbi che sono stati
danneggiati o distrutti durante l’ondata di violenza di marzo. Una
commissione dell’UNESCO ha visitato il Kossovo in aprile, ma non ha
ancora condotto una verifica del danno.
Durante la sua visita in Kossovo Solana ha affermato che la
ricostruzione dei monumenti religiosi era un altro obbligo del governo
del Kossovo.
Ma l’unica cosa che Stana Nikolic vuole sapere è quando la sua casa
sarà completata e non chi farà il lavoro.
Vuole ritornare a Svinjare perchè è da marzo che vive nel
seminterrato della scuola superiore di Mitrovica insieme ad altri 59
serbi, provenienti principalmente da Obilic, che stanno tutti
aspettando che le loro case vengano riparate così da poter finalmente
tornare a casa.
» Fonte: © Osservatorio sui Balcani
index.cfm?fuseaction=news.notizia&NewsID=3249
Serbi del Kossovo: aspettando la ricostruzione
Nel marzo scorso estremisti albanesi avevano bruciato le loro case. Il
governo kossovaro aveva promesso una rapida ricostruzione ma molti
serbi del Kossovo stanno ancora aspettando. Un articolo tratto da IWPR.
(15/07/2004)
Di Tanja Vujisic – IWPR
Traduzione a cura dell'Osservatorio sui Balcani
Stana Nikolic, 73 anni, sta cercando di trovare qualche oggetto della
propria famiglia nel cortile della casa distrutta dal fuoco, dove
viveva fino al 17 marzo di quest’anno.
Quel giorno estremisti albanesi diedero fuoco a tutte le case serbe
nel villaggio di Svinjare, 4 chilometri a sud della città divisa di
Mitrovica.
La casa di Stana non è ancora stata ricostruita e lei non sa quando
potrà farvi ritorno. Delle 134 case incendiate nel villaggio, solo 30
sono sottoposte a ristrutturazione. La sua non è tra queste.
I pochi fortunati sono stati selezionati dal Comitato per la
ricostruzione, istituito dal governo del Kossovo e con a capo il
Ministro della cultura e dello sport Bexhet Brajshori. Il programma
prevede di riparare le case meno danneggiate e di lasciare per ultime
quelle che sono state completamente distrutte.
Sta diventando sempre più chiaro che la promessa del governo di
ricostruire le case distrutte ed incendiate non sarà adempiuta entro il
termine di settembre, a causa soprattutto degli errori fatti nella
valutazione dei fondi necessari.
I ritardi nel programma di ricostruzione a Svinjare si aggiungeranno
al problema più ampio del ritorno dei serbi espulsi alle loro case in
Kossovo.
La maggior parte dei serbi non vogliono fare ritorno individualmente
ai luoghi che hanno abbandonato in marzo, affermano che ritorneranno
solo in gruppo, quando tutte le loro case saranno ricostruite.
L’ultima ondata di violenza in Kossovo, secondo i dati della missione
in Kossovo delle Nazioni Unite, l’UNMIK, ha avuto come conseguenza la
parziale o completa distruzione di circa 843 case e 30 chiese,
lasciando senza casa circa 4.000 persone tra serbi, Rom ed altri non
albanesi.
In aprile il governo kossovaro ha destinato 5 milioni di euro alla
ricostruzione delle case ma in seguito ha raggiunto la somma di 12
milioni di euro.
Si teme ora che anche questa somma più elevata non sarà sufficiente,
ed il governo ed i singoli comuni stanno cercando di procurarsi più
soldi per la ricostruzione.
Mimoza Kusari, portavoce del governo kossovaro, ha riportato ad IWPR
che il governo sta prendendo in considerazione la possibilità, a causa
della grande somma di denaro che sarà necessaria, di organizzare una
conferenza di finanziatori. Ha detto che alcuni comuni hanno già
iniziato a raccogliere per conto loro fondi aggiuntivi, imponendo sovra
imposte sulla registrazione delle automobili.
Durante una visita in kossovo il 7 giugno scorso, l’Alto
Rappresentante per la politica estera dell’Unione Europea, Javier
Solana, ha affermato che l’Unione Europea potrebbe imporre delle
sanzioni se la ricostruzione non venisse terminata per settembre.
“Il discorso sulla ricostruzione non sta andando correttamente” ha
affermato a Pristina “l’inverno è molto vicino, e se per allora le case
non saranno riparate, rischiano di non esserlo mai – e non possiamo
tollerarlo”.
Il 22 giugno, il primo ministro del kossovo, Bajram Rexhepi, ha
fissato una data più avanzata affermando alla radio Free Europe che
prevede che i lavori terminino per la fine di ottobre o ai primi di
novembre.
Peggy Hicks, direttore dell’ufficio per i rimpatri dell’UNMIK, ha
affermato che dubitava che i lavori venissero completati entro la prima
scadenza data dall’UE, “non penso che saranno completati per il primo
settembre, ma le persone potranno vivere nei cortili delle proprie
case, in containers e tende, sino a che le loro case non saranno
terminate.”
Ha aggiunto, “è molto importante fare tutto il possibile per quella
data per guadagnare la fiducia delle persone a cui stiamo riparando le
case.”
I serbi a Obilic, una piccola città dalla quale furono scacciati in
marzo, hanno ricevuto delle case container come dono da parte del
contingente norvegese della KFOR. A Obilic, 108 dei 415 serbi che
vivevano lì fino a marzo hanno fatto ritorno per vivere nei containers.
Sono stati portati containers anche a Svinare come regalo della
Russia, sebbene alcuni siano stati prontamente rubati. Cinque sono
scomparsi due settimane dopo la loro consegna, e sebbene la KFOR e la
polizia delle Nazioni Unite hanno affermato di aver notato il sinistro,
hanno affermato ad IWPR di non essere responsabili della sorveglianza
di tali oggetti.
A parte le case incendiate, non è stata ancora completata una stima
del danno compiuto alle chiese ed ai monasteri serbi che sono stati
danneggiati o distrutti durante l’ondata di violenza di marzo. Una
commissione dell’UNESCO ha visitato il Kossovo in aprile, ma non ha
ancora condotto una verifica del danno.
Durante la sua visita in Kossovo Solana ha affermato che la
ricostruzione dei monumenti religiosi era un altro obbligo del governo
del Kossovo.
Ma l’unica cosa che Stana Nikolic vuole sapere è quando la sua casa
sarà completata e non chi farà il lavoro.
Vuole ritornare a Svinjare perchè è da marzo che vive nel
seminterrato della scuola superiore di Mitrovica insieme ad altri 59
serbi, provenienti principalmente da Obilic, che stanno tutti
aspettando che le loro case vengano riparate così da poter finalmente
tornare a casa.
» Fonte: © Osservatorio sui Balcani
