I don't claim to know the complete resume of everyone who ever worked at Enron. Even so, I can promise that nobody we think of as "Enron executives" started the Carlyle Group which was founded in 1987. So that's just not true. But even if it was all true, every word of it: SO WHAT? What difference does it make to this girl in Canada what Kinder Morgan is up to? Why the furor? If it were true, wouldn't such an alliance make sense, considering Kinder himself is a former Enron executive? Why not do business with folks you trust?

It's not just her, of course. I get emails every day telling me that Ken Lay is still alive and Dick Cheney protected his friends at Enron from investigation and prosecution. Boggles the mind, considering so many Enron execs were prosecuted and imprisoned. Who exactly is he "protecting"? And whatever he's doing, its not very effective. It's all backward and wrong and silly. But the conspiracies metastasize, gaining the weight of truth merely because they've been repeated so many times.

One thing that fosters the growth of these types of conspiracy theories is that there are always weird connections in business. You discover that so-and-so worked for so-and-so and he dated so-and-so's sister and now his sister is running for Vice President so naturally, there's some huge scandal in that. It's just not true.

Sometimes a friend is just a friend.

A few months ago, as grain prices soared, the Wall Street Journal wondered if we were reaching a Malthusian moment, where the world's ability to feed itself would be challenged. I certainly felt like the ability of the U.S. agriculture economy was severely stressed. But this morning the New York Times ran an article on Russian agriculture that was a real eye opener.

Russia occupies an unusual niche in the global food chain. Before the Russian Revolution and the subsequent forced collectivization of farming under Stalin, it was the largest grain exporting nation in the world.

Today, roughly 7 percent of the planet’s arable land is either owned by the Russian state or by collective farms, but about a sixth of all that agricultural land — some 35 million hectares — lies fallow. By comparison, all of Britain has 6 million hectares of cultivatable land.

What is happening is that global capital (including the infamous Carlyle Group) is flooding into the Russian agriculture sector, buying up huge collective farms and providing modern technology--much of it made by John Deere--to increase the productivity of the land. If this works, it will be one more huge export commodity for the Russian economy, which already controls more oil and gas reserves than any other country.

A la lumière de ce que la Grande Muette a déjà admis:
- pourquoi une telle mission de reconnaissance s'est faite en fin de journée, peu propice à une auto-défense efficace dans des endroits escarpés et montagneux?
- pourquoi l'aviation américaine appelée en renfort n'est pas intervenue?
- pourquoi les mirages français envoyés en Afghanistan n'ont pas été mis en action?
- pourquoi alors que la mission comportait des équipes américaines, afghanes et françaises, on ne compte que des blessés et des morts français?
- comment les talibans savaient qu'une mission de reconnaissance passerait à cet endroit, ce jour-là et à cette heure là? une ou plusieurs taupes dans le camp allié?
- pourquoi n'y avait-il pas d'appui aérien dès le début, comme un soutien héliporté?
- qui fourni et qui a des intérêts à fournir les nouvelles armes et leurs munitions aux talibans, les Russes (AK 47, lance-roquette)? idem pour les financements.
Une sorte d'arroseur arrosé puisque les services secrets américains via un trafiquant d'arme israëlien fournissaient des armes russes pendant la guerre d'Afghanistan aux rebelles afghans, afin que le bloc de l'est n'ait pas de preuve formelle du soutien militaire des USA.

La guerre éclair et totale contre les talibans s'est donc clairement transformée en bourbier. A leur époque, les 160 000 soldats soviétiques n'avaient pas réussi à venir à bout des afghans, armés et financés dans les dernières années par la CIA.
Les récentes victimes françaises ne défendent pas les populations, ni les intérêts nationaux de la France comme on pourrait le croire, mais bien des intérêts privés.
Le piège afghan se referme jour après jour sur les coalitions alliées qui ont eu la négligence de suivre la folie américaine et le complexe militaro-industriel mondial.
Quoi de mieux que de bons conflits enlisés pour faire un maximum de profits, du Business sur le long terme? Tant pis pour les victimes civils ou militaires du moment que l'argent public est transféré vers des caisses bien privées.
L'administration Bush avait été montrée du doigt avec ses compagnies de lobby comme Halliburton (Dick Cheney ex-PDG), Chevron (Condolezza Rice ex-membre du conseil d'administration), BlackWater etc...

Que faudrait-il dire du complexe militaro-industriel français qui a financé la campagne de notre nouveau président?
Dassault, Lagardère (via le groupe EADS), Thalès (ex-Thomson CSF), Sagem (Groupe Safran).
Et pour faire le lien entre les deux pieuvres rappelons simplement qu'Olivier Sarkozy, le demi-frère du petit Nicolas, est entré en mars 2008 dans le groupe d'investissement spécialisé en électronique militaire Carlyle Group.
Pour rappel, il est de notoriété public, que ce même fond a vu la participation de John Major, ancien premier ministre britannique, George Bush Père, ex-président des USA mais aussi ex-directeur de la CIA, ex-employé de l'entreprise Dresser Industries fusionnée avec Halliburton, mais aussi et surtout de la puissante famille Ben Laden. Famille qui avait renflouée l'entreprise pétrolière texane alors en quasi-faillite gérée par George Walker Bush, l'actuel président des Etats-Unis.

Le monde est si petit...

Deux films à voir pour se divertir utilement:
- Farenheit 9/11 de Michael Moore, incontournable
- La guerre selon Charlie Wilson, ou comment un seul homme, un sénateur américain, a fait gagner les rebelles afghans contre l'armée rouge et du même coup, a participé activement à la chute de l'empire soviétique quelques années après.

MAJ du 23 août 2008: pour l'idée du piège, du "guet-apens" tellement évidente, c'est confirmé.
A lire dans l'article de FranceSoir.fr: ici

Man, people are stupid sometimes. Im not acting high horseish but sam and bruno were looking for soooo much attention today in computing talking about how they have A.D.D, like it is some traumatic terrifying horrific rare disorder or disease. Bruno is full of shit, and i was just thinking gee man you coould of come up with something better than ADD. srsly. and then i was just all casual and like, 'i have a brain cyst?' LOL i so shat all over there fucking attention seeking selves, it was fucking hilarious. I was like wow man, get a fucking grip. I grew up with a ADHD brother and its nothing different from living with a weirdo who does shit at school. Fuck im tired

The weirdest shit happened yesterday on the bus, okay so im pretty twilight orientated atm so yeah. I was on the bus and looking out the windows, there was HALE st, and then not long after there was EDWARD st and right next to it was a JACOBS pathway !! and then in class we watched some shit and this ugy was apart of the CARLYLE (still the same as carlisle lol) group. All in one day that i noticed them, how weird srsly and i go that bus rout everyday almost.

Events in politics, business, eco-nomics, culture and editorial expression to help enlighten our global citizens. (As opposed to pacifying, numbing and de-sensitizing human beings)

Condi Rice was here during the weekend, in New Zealand spouting the words of "21st century ally'' to NZ Prime Minister Helen Clark and National Party hopeful John Key. Then yesterday, in the afternoon, on Radio New Zealand National, on a programme equivalent to Talk of the Nation on NPR in America, the commentators alluded to the fact Her Honourable Ms. Clark seemingly sees right through the manipulations and implications of aligning with an imperialistic bully.

Quite frankly Ladies and Gentlemen, from seven thousand miles away, I see this as if the Cheney/Bush/Carlyle Group is the dark side of the Force, and Ron Paul, Helen Clark, Kevin Rudd, Ann Richards, Mario Cuomo, Bill Bradley, and a few other voices and leaders scattered throughout recent history are the Jedi. This may be construed as an over-simplified analogy or metaphor, however, this writer has had enough of double entendre, political spin, euphemistic phrase conditioning and all the other silly games played by corporate media.

Today we have special coverage asking questions about Carlyle Group.

Their list of gentlemen (women seem to hold positions of marketing, business development, administration, support) involved with the management of the group reads like an issue of Barron’s, Wall Street Journal, Fortune 500 and Forbes. Know who’s listed?

Middle East

• Shafig bin Laden, older brother of Osama bin Laden

The whole list of one-time and former associates and affiliates at wikipedia.org is here

The following is written on the website for Carlyle Group:

“Carlyle is a private partnership, which means that it is owned by a group of individuals, most of whom are Managing Directors at Carlyle, and two institutional investors. CalPERS, the California Public Employees Retirement Systems, owns approximately 5 percent, and Mubadala Development Company, a strategic investment and development company headquartered in Abu Dhabi, owns 7.5 percent. The companies and real estate in which Carlyle invests are owned by the funds that made the investments.”

“While open to opportunities wherever they can be found, Carlyle focuses on sectors in which it has demonstrated expertise: aerospace & defense, automotive & transportation, consumer & retail, energy & power, financial services, healthcare, industrial, infrastructure, real estate, technology & business services and telecommunications & media…”

“Carlyle’s conservative investment philosophy and disciplined investment process has generated extraordinary returns for its investors. Since its founding in 1987, the firm has invested $43.0 billion in 774 transactions. More than 1,200 investors from 71 countries entrust Carlyle with their capital and their reputations. As one means of aligning its own interests with those of its Limited Partner investors, Carlyle has committed more than $3.9 billion of its own capital to its funds.”

Their areas of expertise and interest pretty much cover all industries which would have a direct effect on the economies of whole countries.

Let’s do the math 1200 investors divided by 71 countries = 16.9 investors on average per country.

Global citizens awake. Who would those 3, 9, 17, or 32 be in each country?

The names, positions held, inter-connections are blatant, quite incestuous really.

However, in their FAQ section, you will find these statements:

4. Who are your investors?

This writer would like to remind the reader that Global Vision is greatly enhanced by the involvement of former Prime Ministers and Presidents – who better to express the trends so money is invested according to such exponential gains? Conservative investment philosophy shows that 66% of their fund is ‘Buyout’and 16% is Leveraged Finance. In my simple assessment, that would be 82% of extreme wealth essentially controlling what they invest in.

Carlyle's investors are public and private institutional investors and high net worth individuals. Carlyle does not disclose information about its investors.

5. How is Carlyle different from other private equity firms?

Carlyle's global presence and local market knowledge sets us apart from other private equity firms. We have Global Vision : Local Insight - Global because Carlyle operates 60 funds in 21 countries; Local because our more than 500 investment professionals work in their home countries. Carlyle is also different because of its conservative investment philosophy; rather than swing for the fences with every investment, we strive for consistency, hitting singles, doubles, and triples with far fewer strike-outs. Carlyle investment professionals also invest their own money alongside our investors, so when we say we treat our investors' money like our own, we mean it.

Stay with us and watch this pattern take shape. <short, pleasant station break>

And we are back, discussing news that no one else will. This may not bode well for wide viewing interest; however, it is our aim to educate, to motivate thinking and the desire to question.

Here’s an example: Le Figaro, France’s printed bastion of published right wing thought followed this course of ownership:

In 1999 the Carlyle Group obtained a 40% stake in the paper, which it later sold in March of 2002. As of 2004, Le Figaro is controlled by Serge Dassault, a conservative businessman and politician best known for running the aircraft manufacturer Dassault Aviation, which he inherited from his father, its founder, Marcel (1892–1986).

Please take notice of which INDUSTRY Monsieur Dassault was from, and now connect the dot to the notation about the expertise in aerospace and defence that Carlyle purports to rely upon for investment. A very convenient chain of association.

In 20-21 years, Carlyle has managed to accumulate $82 billion in managed assets and funds. An awesome feat, then again they’ve had help from some very key principals and directors along the way. Their inception in 1987 was one year before George Bush Sr took residence in the Oval Office. Quite timely.

People of world, if you read this report, it is only a sketch, some might accusingly point out it’s an etch-a-sketch of how the Military Industrial Complex is protecting its lucrative interests and increasing global control. This leads to the enquiry of, “why did Dwight D. Eisenhower warn the American public of the MIC?”

He described the Cold War saying: "We face a hostile ideology global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose and insidious in method..." and warned about what he saw as unjustified government spending proposals and continued with a warning that "we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex... Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."

Was he not describing the role of powerful U.S. industries manipulating the post-war economies around the world?

We encourage interaction, taking responsibility, learning.

We hope you will espouse your views and comments.

Thank you for tuning in.

Brave New World News – when truth needs to be heard.

Here's to Evolution - the name defines the concept.

This writer supports Ron Paul for U.S. President

It's been 15 years since IBM (IBM) set what was then the record for the biggest annual loss in U.S. corporate history. Today, thanks to growth in emerging markets, Big Blue is one of the tech industry's big success stories -- and is expected to report healthy second-quarter sales and profits after the market closes today. IBM is also one of only four stocks on the Dow 30 that are up over the past year (the others are Procter & Gamble (PG), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), and McDonald's (MCD)).

The man who started IBM on the path to recovery, Lou Gerstner, copped a Legend in Leadership award at the Yale CEO Summit in New York in last month. At the podium, Gerstner, CEO of IBM from 1993 to 2002 and now chairman of private equity giant Carlyle Group, dished up some wise tips on the topic he knows best: how to transform a Fortune 500 company. Here's an edited transcript of his advice:

1. It's very important to distinguish between a transformation and a turnaround. A turnaround involves a company that has fallen off the rails and has executed poorly. It takes a driven executive, but it's not that bad. A transformation is truly difficult. The company must fundamentally change its model. It's very, very problematic.

2. If you're trying to transform a dodo, you're not going to make it. I agree with Warren Buffett's rule: "When a management with a reputation for brilliance tackles a business with a reputation for bad economics, it is usually the reputation of the business that remains intact."

3. It's all about culture. You have to transform the culture, not just the strategy. Culture is what people do when no one is watching.

4. Integrate as a team. When I arrived at IBM, there were "Team" signs all around. I asked, "How do people get paid?" They told me, "We pay people based on individual performance."

5. You have to understand what people do everyday -- the processes, the values, the rewards. It requires immense involvement by the CEO. If you're a CEO who tells employees, "That's it. You know where we're going," you'll find yourself with no followers.

P.S. Gerstner mentioned that two or three CEOs have gone into large corporations and "failed to transform" them -- but wouldn't name names. He let one name slip: Kodak (EK). What two other companies do you think Gerstner was thinking of?

"So what? Who cares? Go to Starbucks," you say. Well, I've acquiesced to drinking the bitter swill at Starbucks, but for anyone who has spent 45 minutes of their lives waiting at one of the new Starbucks drive-thrus while some douchebag orders a triple decaf macchiato, there is truly no suitable replacement for the ease and alacrity of the Dunkin' Donuts drive-thru or the sweet, smooth taste of Dunkin' Donuts coffee.

Perhaps some context is in order to fully understand how debilitating this is to me. In my view, Dunkin' Donuts is not just some meaningless, faceless chain of coffee purveyors. I grew up in Massachusetts where Dunkin' Donuts opened its first store in 1950 in Quincy, Massachusetts. It's more than just coffee, it's part of our identity. There are four defining characteristics of a true Massachusetts resident (no, one of them isn't that "you have to be an asshole" -- I know what you're thinking). To be a righteous Massachusettsian, you have to love/appreciate/prefer these four things:

1. The Red Sox

2. Candlepin Bowling

3. Gambling/Lottery

4. Dunkin' Donuts

So you see, not having Dunkin' Donuts in L.A. is more than a mere inconvenience, it's an affront to my self-identity. While Dunkin' Donuts brand coffee is now available at Target, there's truly no substitute for a store-brewed cup of regular Dunkin' Donuts coffee (that's 3 creams and 3 sugars for the uninitiated).

But lest you think that my sole desire for this post is to solipsistically rant about how I am forced to drink Starbucks, I assure you that I have a much grander purpose in mind. What I'd like to discuss is the disturbing trend that I have noticed at Dunkin' Donuts during recent trips back to the East Coast. Since moving to Los Angeles in March of 2006, I have paid a number of visits to Dunkin' Donuts stores in various states, drinking approximately 15 cups of coffee from 7 or 8 different franchises -- a fairly substantial and diverse sample size.

My first trip back to Boston occurred in June, 2006, when I returned for a weekend to attend a good friend's wedding. I eagerly raced to the nearest Dunkin' Donuts location only to receive a bitter cup of coffee more consistent with black tar than the saccharine ambrosia of my fondest recollections. Another coffee from another store produced similar results, but I blindly dismissed my experiences as aberrations. Looking back I should have considered that in the previous 2,000 odd cups of Dunkin' Donuts I had quaffed in my lifetime, I had absolutely no memory of ever having an imperfect cup. But at the time, I saw no pattern.

The exact dates and times of my subsequent Dunkin' Donuts visits elude me, but I can attest that I drank cups from locations in Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York, and New Jersey. And what was similar was that in every instance the coffee was harsh and acrid, nothing like it used to be. A pattern had fully and undeniably emerged.

My most recent cup of Dunkin' Donuts coffee, which I had just two weeks ago, was so hot in temperature that even after I poured half of it out and replaced it with half & half, I still couldn't drink it ten minutes later. Now anyone who is a regular coffee drinker knows that particular restaurants will try to cover-up the low quality of their coffee by brewing it extra hot.

You may remember the infamous 1994 McDonald's coffee case, Liebeck vs. McDonalds Restaurant, where an elderly woman sued McDonalds after she suffered third degree burns when she spilled McDonalds coffee onto her lap. ABC News called the lawsuit "the posterchild of excessive lawsuits." Now I shouldn't have to tell you that anytime the mainstream press informs you of something with absolute certainly, it's best to reconsider independently; and in this case it's no different. Because anyone who had the displeasure of imbibing the scalding hot, liquified ground rubber that McDonald's passed off as coffee would know that McDonald's was not some poor, little multi-billion dollar conglomerate being conned by a duplicitous 81 year old, former department store clerk. During the case, the woman's attornies discovered that McDonald's required its franchises to serve their coffee at between 180 and 190 degrees fahrenheit, whereas most establishments serve their coffee at approximately 140 degrees fahrenheit. At McDonald's temperature, the coffee would cause a third-degree burn in two to seven seconds. Liebeck was awarded $2.7 million in punitive damages but eventually settled for closer to $600,000. [Note: McDonalds has since replaced their coffee with Green Mountain coffee beans].

So you might be wondering what could possibly have occurred in the past two years that would effect the quality of Dunkin' Donuts coffee so drastically? Well, as it turns out, in December, 2005, three private-equity firms, Bain Capital Partners, the Carlyle Group and Thomas H. Lee Partners acquired Dunkin' Donuts from Pernod Ricard, the French wine and spirits company. The deal was finalized in March, 2006, the very month I moved to California!

If Bain Capital rings a bell it's likely because you may have recently heard that it was co-founded by that phony corporate stooge, Mitt Romney. And if the Carlyle Group sounds familar, chances are that you saw the scathing Michael Moore documentary, Fahrenheit 911, that delves into the shady history of the global private equity firm that employed George H.W. Bush as a senior advisor and listed as one of its investors the Bin Laden family. After 9/11, the Bin Laden family's investments became embarassing to the Carlyle Group so the Bin Ladens were forced to liquidate their assets. Here's a refresher courtesy of Michael Moore.

Finally the picture is crystal clear as to what happened to Dunkin' Donuts: those evil rat bastards at the Carlyle Group and Bain Capital are skimping on the quality of the coffee beans in order to save a lousy buck! It gets worse, according to the New York Daily News, since 2006 Dunkin' Donuts has been suing existing single-unit franchisees in order to replace them with multi-unit franchisees. The article, written by a Dunkin' Donuts franchise owner, details the betrayal:

Dunkin' Donuts has sued other franchise owners 154 times since 2006.

Over the same stretch of time, McDonalds was involved in five lawsuits. And Subway, a company that has four times the number of locations as Dunkin' Donuts, sued its franchises 12 times.

After talking to dozens of franchise owners just like us, we learned that this was more than an unusual litigation binge. This was a corporate strategy.

In order to compete with Starbucks, Dunkin' Donuts has announced a plan to open 15,000 stores by 2016. There's only one problem with that plan. Because Dunkin' Donuts is made up entirely of franchisee-owned stores, it relies on franchisees to open new stores.

Only large, multiunit owners who already own dozens of stores have the means to expand quickly.

Dunkin's answer to this conundrum is to systematically replace single-store owners with multistore owners. And because they can't just force these mom-and-pop shops to sell, they strong-arm them with threats of lawsuits over minor "contract infractions."

The consequences of this are real, personal and painful. The owners of these stores - who overwhelmingly tend to be immigrants - lose their entire life's work.

Maybe America runs on Dunkin', but Dunkin' itself is a corporate giant that runs on the sweat of franchisees large and small.

We small franchisees have just about been sweated out. And with us, perhaps the last vestiges of what mom-and-pop New York used to be.

Dunkin Donuts was like a kindly grandmother that plied you with tasty treats; now they're like an alcoholic, pederast uncle that scars you for life. These corrupt, soulless bastards make me sick. And they're un-American to boot! So this is where I draw the line; this is where I fight. To borrow a line from The Dude: "This will not stand, ya know. This aggression will not stand, man!"

You might imagine that the intended locus of my anger would be those brobdingnagian corporate entities that have hijacked my beloved Dunkin' Donuts. Oh, but you would be mistaken. No, I prefer to put a face on my mortal enemies, so I choose to hold the George Bushes and Osama Bin Laden most responsible for this outrage even if they are no longer associated with the Carlyle Group. After all, if you're going to misplace some anger, you can find worse targets than the Bin Laden and Bush families, right?

I feel like forming a Political Action Committee devoted to seeing George W. Bush impeached or maybe buying a rifle, flying to Pakistan, parachuting into the mountainous tribal region, living off the land for months by eating moss and tree bark, befriending the local tribesman in order to persuade them to identify Osama Bin Laden's hidden lair, and then finally smoking his cowarldy ass. Screw due process and the rule of law, it's time for some Edmund Dantes, Uma Thurman in Kill Bill, old-fashioned, eye-for-an-eye style vengeance!

Corporate America, in its all-encompassing pursuit to milk every last cent out of a credulous public, has finally crossed the line.  Join me, friends, our time has come to poke these avaricious mongrels where it hurts most: in the wallet! I advise an immediate boycott of the Bush family, the Bin Laden family, Dunkin' Donuts coffee, the Carlyle Group, Bain Capital Partners, and Thomas H. Lee Partners. Divest your money! Save your souls!

Until those un-American corporate fiends have withdrawn their rapacious claws from my beloved company and Dunkin' Donuts coffee is fully restored to its resplendent glory, we shall not rest! Our fortitude will not flag! Our anger will not abate! Anarchy will reign! Justice will prevail!

[I'm not playing around here, I'd dead serious. And as it turns out, you won't have to worry about hurting a small business owner with your boycott since it appears that they'll all soon be replaced by "multi-unit" owners anyway.]

I have heard that the golden rule is , "Those who keep the gold, make the rules or those who make the rules, keep the gold.". Today, the big names are not just the global multi-national-corporations but the powerful "Private Equity" firms. For example , I was intrigued when i looked at some of the facts about the top private equity firm "Carlyle Group".

The Carlyle Group is a global private equity investment firm, based in Washington, D.C., with more than $81.1 billion of equity capital under management. Interestingly, some of the key people associated with this company are/were George W. Bush,Shafig bin Laden (older brother of Osama bin Laden), Olivier Sarkozy (half-brother of Nicolas Sarkozy, President of France).

Qlog : 5 Minutes

1. What is the exact role of a private equity firm towards economy?

2. What is the role of politicians in a private-equity firm ?

3. What are the types of PE's ?

4. what is the difference between PE & PE funds?

5. On what basis PE & PE Funds performance are measured?

According to Carlyle Group's press release on the deal, Sinorgchem plans to use the investment to expand its operations overseas. Specific plans were not disclosed.

“Sinorgchem is a high-growth company that has the opportunity to further expand its market position,” said Yi Luo, Managing Director of Carlyle Asia Partners (CAP). “Carlyle has a long history of working with Chinese companies to create value and is an experienced investor in the chemical sector. We are confident that Sinorgchem’s overseas expansion will benefit from the operational expertise of our pool of senior chemical industry professionals, and from potential partnership opportunities with our portfolio companies and global network.”

As covered previously on this blog, Sinorgchem's 4-ADPA and PPD business is the subject of a protracted legal dispute with the Flexsys unit of Solutia, which alleges that the Sinorgchem production process violates Flexsys patents. This on-going case has hung over Sinorgchem for the last few years, but several recent decisions have favored Sinorgchem. In December 2007, a federal appeals court reversed and remanded the finding that Sinorgchem had directly infringed on the Flexsys patents. In June 2008, the USITC rescinded a limited exclusion order barring the sale of rubber antidegradants manufactured by Sinorgchem in the United States. The ban had been instituted in July 2006.

Here is a prior post on the legal case, including links to numerous previous posts.

Press release from The Carlyle Group.

Here is a link to an article at FinanceAsia.com, which has additional information on the investment.

Carlyle Group, started in 1987 by a few Marriott Hotel exec's, a former Carter aid, and others, and funded by T Rowe Price at the famous Carlyle Hotel in NYC, (thus the name). 'Carlyle' sounds old and stately and prosperous, right? CG is that, prosperous. They've enjoyed phenomenal growth in both size and dimension; multi-billion dollar defense contractors raking in obscenely hugh profit margins.

How DO they do that? By forming what's basically a military industrial complex, that'd be military+business+hired politicians on staff=influence over and on the power of war(s). Methinks this is a very dangerous combo...

DC seemed a weird choice at the time, but with headquarters there they quickly picked up Frank Carlucci, the ex-Secretary of Defense under Reagan in 1989, how convenient, the same man who made defense policy can then reap the benefits i.e. exploit his own policy making for financial gain, brilliant strategy really...

With all those 'gun for hire' pols on board, you can see how easy it was/is for carlyle Group to predict trends, in market, in politics, and their ability to influence it all...pretty astounding, yes? And with Bush Sr on board, well, American ex-presidents carry a lot of clout, and a grandpa-like ex-president with a son who is our current pres will draw no scrutiny from Congress (or anywhere else). Nice.

Why or why not any scrutiny, you ask? Bc who would want to instigate that investigative s**tstorm? You might as well shoot yourself in the head, bc the political career would be over. Raising up questions about the Bush's would be a political insider no-no. That's why they get away with it, just in case you're wondering....

All that and they're privately held so no open reports, nothing...all that power and no scrutiny at all.

Oh yeah, and they owned United Defense, (think Iraq war 'crusader' funding debacle, yes GWB was trying to get this 'out dated for modern warfare' equipment funded, oh and dad just happens to be on payroll, now that's an inconvenient truth...) until UD went public, making Carlyle group a tidy 237M profit in one day, I hope dad (Bush Sr) bought the celebration champers!

Isn't it amazing...? astonishing...? Oh yeah, I almost forgot, and Carlyle owns 28% of Vivendi Universal, a telecommunications giant...where does it end???

It sounds like another conspiracy theory but hate to tell you, I checked many sources on this one, the subject's been brewing in my blog mind for weeks...and there's so much info to back this up that you'd think we'd all be just a bit more pissed off about the Bush family's reputation...or are they just plain politically and personally 'untouchable'??

Your thoughts/opinions please?

** as usual, commenters do as you wish...respond here or e me @ Lmdevin@att.net or Lillian@lilliandevin.com and thanks for your e's, I appreciate your input.

Tomorrow, in honor of hump day, I will take on a lighter subject : ) maybe...

Following the Mokenman post on Bush Grabs the Last Treasures, it would be less than complete if we did not mention Bush and his administration, and their collusion with big oil companies to steal the biggest prize, STUPENDOUS PROFITS FROM THE HIGH COST OF OIL, RIGHT NOW! ( See Mokenman Post on  "Iraq War Proof in Finally")

It will be difficult for you to conceive of how much wealth I am talking about here. But to get an idea, consider the billions of dollars the major American Oil Companies have been making over the past three years. Now double that amount for just 2009 alone, and increase it for each year thereafter! These kinds of profits have never been made by anyone in history, because such a redistribution of wealth to so few, has the ultimate affect of toppling the worlds economy! The results can be nothing other than the pitting of haves against have nots. Acts called "Terroristic" will be the only meaningful weapon available to the have nots. Anarchy, deep divisions among the people of the world, and multiple wars on all continents can be the ONLY outcome. None of what I am telling you is a secret, nor is it a prediction. It is what is happening NOW!

Let’s start with the winners and losers so it is easier to follow the play.

WINNERS
Bush Family and friends (major oil interests)
Carlyle Group (includes Ben Laden and Bush families) Exxon, Shell, BP (and a few other industry giants) Halliburton and subs (Dick Chaney) U.S. installed Iraqi leaders (Bribes and paybacks)
U.S. Banking companies and investment banks
Secret Commodity Investment Groups (located off shore)
Major players in the world oil markets (hedging futures)
U.S. Military and Government leaders (rewarded with
private sector jobs by profiteering companies)
Wealthy Investors
Countries which produce significant quantities of crude oil.

LOSERS

The American people

The Iraqi people

The people of the world

Jobs

Institutions

The poor

We need to agree the U.S. invasion of Iraq was designed and carried out so the winners could get richer, maintaining or increasing their power positions in the world. It was about power and world domination (as spelled out in THE PROJECT FOR THE NEW AMERICAN CENTURY go to http://cryptome.org/rad.htm

Secondly, it helps to realize “speak” from Bush administration sources is not truthful, and the truth is either hidden, or the opposite of what is being said. In the old days it was referred to as "lying"!

THE BLAME GAME
Establishment Press (being fed by the perps) has been the purveyor of multiple myths and accusations about the causes for the high price of oil today, and its ensuing destruction of world economies. Some of the most popular scapegoats are:

#1 The Chinese and India
#2 Decreases in supply- need for expanded exploration/drilling.
#3 OPEC
#4 "Speculators"

A review and study of the above "causes" reveals some simple facts. The facts do not support the accusations. Supply is up. Demand is actually decreased from 2007. OPEC has increased production. Established reserves are not being drilled in spite of existing lease holds (holding out for higher prices). The Chinese and Indian economies have not developed to be the bad guys over night. Their consumption although increasing, is not related to the spike in oil prices I will site here. When you look at "speculators" no one know who they actually are! They are for all practical purposes, invisible or secret!

What the media has accomplished is to vilify the right people, "rounding up the usual suspects". And the Congress of the United States is busy working the vilification as fast as they can to accomplish absolutely nothing, except to gain some votes doing their meaningless business as usual! The culprits will not be brought to world justice! They will accumulate massive riches associated with oil, I GUARANTEE IT!

So how about we take a wild stab to find our culprits, and look within our list of WINNERS? What about the idea that just maybe this SURGE IN oil price at this time IS NO MISTAKE! And stay with me; maybe the secret "manipulators" are none other than the same thieves who have been ripping you off all along. Only this time, the stakes are bigger than ever, took better planning, better collusion, and a lot more sacrifice by the losers than ever before, not to mention ONE MILLION DEAD OR INJURED IRAQI, THREE MILLION DISPLACED IRAQI, AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF DEAD OR INJURED AMERICANS! JUST MAYBE THE POWER ELITE, THAT IS GEORGE W. BUSH AND FRIENDS, AND THE BIG OIL CORPORATIONS SUCH AS EXXON, BP, AND SHELL, IN CONCERT WITH HALLIBURTON AND THE MILITARY ESTABLISHMENT, FINANCED BY WALL STREET INVESTMENT BANKS AND THE BANKING INDUSTRY, ARE IN FACT THE PERPS!

Look at these interesting facts taken from the "experts" in our study:

(following excerps from Seymour Hersh)

On July 1, the cost for refined fuel used by troops will jump from $127.68 a barrel to $170.94, an astounding 34 percent increase in just six months and more than double what the Pentagon was paying three years ago.

While prices charged to war fighting units have fluctuated in recent years, they have not faced such a steep spike in so few months. The cost of jet fuel, for example, jumped from $2.31 a gallon in October, the start of the 2008 budget year, to $3.04 in December. As of next month, units will start paying $4.07 a gallon.

If oil prices stay elevated as expected, the revenues would create a substantial surplus for Iraq at a time when Americans are facing an economic slump, aggravated by painfully high gas prices.

According to the center, every $1 increase in the market price per barrel translates into a $130 million rise in costs for the military because it relies so heavily on fuel. In Iraq alone, for example, the military consumes some 1.6 million gallons of fuel a day.

Covert actions to de-stablize Iran by bush admin:

Highly classified Presidential Finding signed by Bush .........

"The Finding was focused on undermining Iran's nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change," the article cited a person familiar with its contents as saying, and involved "working with opposition groups and passing money."

Funding for the covert escalation, for which Bush requested up to $400 million, was approved by congressional leaders, according to the article, citing current and former military, intelligence and congressional sources.

Among groups inside Iran benefiting from U.S. support is the Jundallah, also known as the Iranian People's Resistance Movement, according to former CIA officer Robert Baer. Council on Foreign Relations analyst Vali Nasr described it to Hersh as a vicious organization suspected of links to al Qaeda.

oil high cost june 08

The ministers also failed to find common ground on whether to take action to curb speculation in oil futures markets, which some have blamed for exacerbating price increases. While Italy called for measures like making futures trading more expensive, this was resisted by the United States and Britain, where big futures markets operate.

The American Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., attributed higher oil prices to changes in supply and demand and a failure by oil-rich nations to build enough wells and refineries.

Oil consumption in 2008 is already below that of last year and, for the first time since the 1970s, a major expansion is underway on the Gulf Coast that will eventually bring the world’s largest refinery online.

As a matter of fact, government has been part of the problem.
Aggressive promotion of ethanol and other alternative energy sources is partly to blame for the recent run-up in food prices.

and by diverting 70,000 barrels a day from one hole in the ground to another known as the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

Who is Speculating?
fromRaymond J. Learsy- huffington post article
As to the speculators, yes ,they play a role, but no mention of who is speculating and why. But to allow the comments by Saudi oil minister al Naimi that "Today there is no link between oil (market) fundamentals and prices" as reported by Morocco's Ashraq al-Awast, boggles the mind. More on this in a future post.

But wait, wait. We have also made our contribution to this clown's "mise en scene." As star player on our team is none other than our President Bush. His starring role has been fashioned by the following lines recited earlier this week and quoted by Reuters "Bush urges OPEC to weigh pain of high oil prices" 03.05.08: "My advice to OPEC -- of course they haven't listened to it -- my advice to OPEC is understand the consequences of high energy prices, because I do," Bush told reporters. Wha??

This from a President who --

- Who has seen the price of oil quadruple under his watch while doing virtually nothing to counter this vast increase.

- Has done virtually nothing to abate demand for fossil fuels during his presidency including the mandating of truly meaningful mileage standards for cars.

- Pushed Iraq to rejoin OPEC as practically the first order of business after the removal of Saddam Hussein.

- Never in a meaningful way caused OPEC to moderate their aggressive pricing policies.

- As the price of oil was slipping below $50 barrel, came to the oil industry and OPEC's rescue by announcing a policy of doubling the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (STP) in January 2007.

- Continuing to fill the STP irrespective of price causing the likes of Frank Verrastro of the Center of Strategic and International Studies to exclaim this past week that if the White House was truly interested in lowering oil prices it would stop sending crude oil into the STP. "If you're begging people to put oil on the market why in the world are you taking it off?" Verrastro said, while probably scratching his head.

- Appointing as Secretary of Energy a like able but untested personage as Sam Bodman whose naiveté on how things work caused his Energy Department to respond to criticism about continuing filling the SPR even in the face of President Bush's comments by saying "reserve shipments are minuscule." Thus they betrayed a total lack of understanding of how markets function, exacerbated with Bodman's simplistic comment "Look, the price of oil is set in the trading rooms in New York and London and Tokyo and Frankfurt and all around the world". Bodman continued, "Whatever it is, it is." No comprehension whatsoever that the United State by word and deed as the largest consumer of oil by far in the world, had the means to influence the mind set and temper of those "trading rooms."

If President Bush means when he says he understands the consequences of high energy prices is that his friends in the oil industry are doing fabulously well and the oil companies are raking it in and that OPEC is setting up Sovereign Wealth Funds to buy America, well then, he hit the nail right on the head. As for the rest us, I think we understood a long time ago what he really means, by what he claims to understand when it comes to oil prices.

SPECULATION/MANIPULATION: ( IN STEPS BEAR STERNS AND THE LIKES)

LOUIS H. EDERINGTON
University of Oklahoma - Division of Finance
JAE HA LEE
Sungkyunkwan University
study on who trades futures
With the assistance of the Office of
Policy of the US Department of Energy we assigned all commercial traders to one of the following
categories: (1) refiners, (2) marketers/distributors and pipeline companies, (3) investment banks and
brokers, (4) commercial banks, (5) energy traders, (6) other energy and (7) end users according to
their primary line-of-business8

While we do not have enough information to label a particular trade as a hedge or a
speculation, we know that five of our eleven groups (refiners, marketers/distributors, commercial
banks, investment banks, and end-users) have substantial cash or forward market positions in heating
oil or related products which they could be hedging. Accordingly, we label these “potential hedgers.”
Of these, we are least comfortable with designating investment banks as hedgers. As previously
noted, while both investment and commercial banks make markets in energy swaps and other OTC
products, we separate the two since regulators of commercial banks should restrict their trades to
purely hedging activities while investment banks could be speculating. Nonetheless, investment banks
are certainly “potential” hedgers since they do have positions in the swap market.

AND THE WINNERS ARE!

Potential Hedgers:
Refiners 1781 34.1% 28.8%
Marketers/Distributors 1691 14.6% 20.1%
Commercial Banks 1481 6.9% 2.4%
Investment Banks 3791 26.9% 22.3%
End Users 1121 0.8% 1.4%
Total 83.3% 75.0%

IN THE CASE CITED, THE ABOVE REPRESENTS 83% OF THE MANIPULATION GOING ON IN THE MARKET PRICING OF OIL, AND HAS NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH ACTUAL COSTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF EXISTING OIL SUPPLIES! SECRET ACCOUNTS HELD OFFSHORE BY PARTIES UNKNOWN, CONTROL SUBSTANTIAL SUMS OF MONEY BEING USED TO SPECULATE, OR IN FACT MANIPULATE MARKETS, BUT .............THE MAJOR PLAYERS ARE IN FACT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT, ITS CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH, THE MAJOR OIL COMPANIES, THEIR AFFILIATED INDUSTRY PARTNERS. AND THE BANKING INDUSTRY!

So if you have a complaint about inflation, the high cost of goods, your lost job, or high gasoline prices, look within. It is you America, it is YOU! Your continued ignorance, inability, or unwillingness, to face the truth of who is in charge, who YOU sold out to! Corporate America Rules! And YOU keep playing the game.

"The Truth Shall Set You Free"

Mokenman

The maniac work ethic paid off. Dougan, now 48, still keeps up the pace, say his colleagues. Though these days, he runs early in the morning—in Zurich, where he's based, or near his Connecticut home, when he works out of Credit Suisse's New York office. Viewed as green when he took the top job in in May 2007, Dougan has performed pretty well in a punishing environment. It sounds crazy to say that $8 billion in asset writedowns is good, but in fact it is compared to rivals like UBS (UBS), Citigroup (C), Merrill Lynch (MER) and Morgan Stanley. Since the start of 2007, those banks have taken bigger hits than Credit Suisse has. Among its major rivals, only Goldman Sachs (GS) and JPMorgan Chase (JPM) have beat Credit Suisse in 12-month stock performance.

Of course, Dougan and his rivals are still wrestling with the downturn. But Credit Suisse has managed to pick up talent, particularly in private banking and investment banking. Rob Shafir, the CEO of asset management and the Americas, joined Credit Suisse from Lehman Brothers (LEH) last year. Norman Mineta, the former U.S. Secretary of Transportation, is newly on board advising clients in ever-hot infrastructure investments. And with blood in the streets, Dougan seems hungry to recruit more.

P.S. Also at last night's Credit Suisse soiree: Norm Pearlstine. He's the former editor in chief of Time Inc.—and once my boss's boss. Pearlstine recently left Carlyle Group, the private equity firm, to go to Bloomberg in a new position, chief content officer. Ever since, I've wondered what he's really up to—and what his arrival might mean for expansion-minded Bloomberg. I asked him. "So, Norm, did you go to Bloomberg as a deal guy or as an editor?" Pearlstine smiled and replied, "I have two desks." In fact, he does—one next to Bloomberg editor in chief Matt Winkler and the other near the company's president, Dan Doctoroff. Who knows what that setup signals?

Many people go on autopilot when it comes to religion or politics. So here are some empirical facts. Israel is a country that has government-sponsored terrorism, and the US supports it. They are a country with racially segregated settlements on land that is taken by force.

Civilian Palestinians are shot and their homes are bulldozed. Israel is expanding its territory in the name of ‘defense’ through “Jew only” settlements, which the US helps to subsidize. Why does the US support this? Because Israel is a cash-cow for the American military industrial-complex which earmarks ‘aid’ to be recycled on the defense industry which US politicians profit from through equity firms such as the Carlyle group for whom former president Bush is a spokesperson.

Former IBM (IBM) CEO and chairman Lou Gerstner, now chairman of private equity giant Carlyle Group, at the recent Yale CEO Summit in Manhattan

Source: Aleeka.com

The Timeline

2007

A JANUARY 03 Former Chariman & CEO Alan "Ace" Greenberg exercises options to buy 150,000+ shares at $73.75 and he immediately sells all of those shares at the market price of $163.11. He realizes an immediate profit of $13 million.
B JUNE 22 Bear Stearns commits $3.2bn in secured loans to bail out one of its hedge funds. It says its troubles are 'relatively contained'.
C JULY 17 Bear Stearns reveals that one of its hedge funds has lost all of its value. Another worth 9 per cent of its value at the end of April.
D OCTOBER 22 Bears Stearns secures a share-swap deal with Citic, China's largest securities firm. Citic pays $1bn for about 6 per cent stake in Bear Stearns. The US bank agrees to eventually pay the same for about 2 per cent of Citic.
E NOVEMBER 1 Newspaper suggests that CEO Cayne was out of touch during the collapse of the two hedge funds. He dismisses the media concerns as "noise".
F DECEMBER 7 Joe Lewis, Bahamas-based billionaire, up his stake to 8 per cent, showing that he believes the Bear Stearns shares are undervalued.(He went on to realize a $1 Billion loss in Bear Stearns)
G DECEMBER 20 The bank reports its first-ever quarterly loss. The loss is nearly four times analysts' forecasts, and includes a $1.9bn writedown on its holdings of mortgage assets.
H DECEMBER 21 Company Insiders sell almost $50 million in stock. Insiders included CEO James Cayne (Who personally dumped $15 million of the stock), former CEO Alan Greenberg (Sold $8 million) and Future CEO Alan Schwartz ($6 million sold).

2008

JANUARY 7 2008 CEO Cayne retires under pressure, but stays on as non-executive chairman. Alan Schwartz becomes president and chief executive.

FEBRUARY 14 In reaction to the fall in the bank's share price since the share-swap deal, it emerges that Citic has been renegotiating the agreement.

FEBRUARY 28 Rebel investors in Bear Stearns seize two of the bank's failed hedge funds in an attempt to regain some of the $1.6bn lost in the previous summer's collapse.

MARCH 7 Carlyle Capital Corporation sees its shares suspended in Amsterdam.
The $22bn hedge fund suffered exposure to mortgage backed securities, and had received substantial additional margin calls and default notices from its lenders.Bear Stearns is seen as heavily exposed to Carlyle Group, founder and 15 per cent owner of CCC. *Carlyle Capital Corp. (CCC) was formed in August 2006 by the Carlyle Group for the purpose of making investments in U.S. mortgage-backed securities. In March 2008, only 19 months after being formed, CCC defaulted on about US$ 16.6 billion of debt. Previous and Current board members of the Carlyle Group include
George H.W. Bush, former United States President George W. Bush, current United States President Shafig Bin Laden, brother of Osama Bin Laden James Baker, former US Secretary of State Arthur Levitt, former Chairman of The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Donald Rumsfeld, former Secretary of Defense

March 10, 2008

Alan "Ace" Greenberg, responding to the price liquidity runors which caused shares of Bear to drop 10% in early trading, told CNBC that the liquidity rumors surrounding the company are "totally ridiculous." Shares responded and initially jumped on the news, only to lose more ground later in the day.

March 11, 2008

Noon: Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke attends a lunch meeting with the "Who's Who on Wall St." Attendees JPMorgan Chase 's Jamie Dimon, Goldman Sachs’s CEO Lloyd Blankfein, Lehman Brothers boss Richard Fuld, Morgan Stanley President James Gorman, Citigroup’s Robert Rubin, Blackstone Group’s Stephen Schwarzman and Merrill Lynch’s John Thain. Who's noticeably absent? Bear Stearns! Every major financial institution in the United States, except Bear Stearns, had a meeting about bank liquidity. There were rumors of liquidity problems at Bear Stearns since that Monday! What do you think they were talking about???
Evening: Jim Cramer, when asked his view of selling Bear Stearns, responds "NO, NO, NO! ...Bear Stearns is FINE...Bear Stearns is not in trouble..Don't move your money from Bear...That's just silly, don't be silly!"
MARCH 13 CCC collapses. Bear Stearns shares fall 17 per cent as investors grow anxious about its exposure to CCC. Schwartz comments: "Our balance sheet is not weakened at all."

Obvious Insider Trading

The following chart proves that there was insider trading during the Bear Stearns collapse. Look at the major jump in stock price AFTER the deal was announced that Bear would be sold for $2/share but BEFORE any news that JP Morgan would increase their offer to $10/share. The price exceeded $7/share before the news of an increased offer. Would you be willing to pay $7 for a company which is to be sold for $2? Would you even be willing to pay $2.01 for a company to be sold for $2? Somebody new something!!
What about Jimmy Cayne? The former CEO was largest employee stock holder. He didn't sell his remaining 5.6 million shares at $2. He sold his shares on March 25th, the day after the SECOND offer price of $10!

MARCH 14 JP Morgan and the New York Federal Reserve rush to the rescue of Bear Stearns. Shares crash almost 50 per cent.
MARCH 16 JP Morgan agrees to buy Bear Stearns in a deal that values the stricken bank's shares at $2 each, with JP Morgan exchanging 0.05473 of each of its shares for one Bear share.
MARCH 22 A powerful group of shareholders including British billionaire Joe Lewis plot a legal challenge against the $2 a share, cut-price offer.
MARCH 23 It emerges that JP Morgan is in talks with the US Federal Reserve and Treasury Department about a possible increased offer for Bear Stearns.
MARCH 24 JP Morgan raises its offer for Bear Stearns to $10 a share

MARCH 25 Jimmy Cayne, Bear Stearns’ chairman and former chief executive, sells his 5pc stake.
People's life savings were wiped out and many sold at $2 on the news of the offer but someone was buying, and buying heavily! Someone made a FORTUNE because they had non-public information.
The criminals can easily be identified if the SEC did its job and investigated this. There hasn't been ANY inquiries to date! ]]> http://underinformation.wordpress.com/?p=1614 Wed, 11 Jun 2008 04:08:25 +0000 satyrikon http://underinformation.wordpress.com/?p=1614 Carlyle buys chemicals Greek distribution company Neochimiki

The Carlyle Group has acquired 73.54 per cent of the shares of Neochimiki L.V. Lavrentiadis S.A. Industrial and Commercial Company for €19 per share. The transaction values the company at €749m.

@@@@@

The Carlyle Group Acquires Chemicals Distribution Company Neochimiki for an Enterprise Value of €749 Million

09 May, 2008

Global private equity firm The Carlyle Group today announced that it has acquired 73.54% of the shares of Neochimiki L.V. Lavrentiadis S.A. Industrial and Commercial Company (ATHEX ticker: NEOCHI) for €19 per share in several block trades over the Athens Stock Exchange and will subsequently launch a mandatory tender offer for the remaining outstanding shares and will take all other measures available under applicable Greek laws to acquire all the shares of Neochimiki at the same price. 20% of the shares were acquired from Lavrentis Lavrentiadis, former Chairman and CEO and son of the founder of Neochimiki, with the remaining shares having been acquired from several international institutional shareholders. The transaction implies an enterprise value of €749 million. Neochimiki is an independent chemicals company headquartered in Palaio Faliro, Athens, Greece, focused both on the distribution of chemical raw materials sourced from a wide network of large multinational chemicals suppliers and the production and distribution of fertilizers and raw materials for the coatings industry. Through its strong infrastructure network, Neochimiki serves more than 8,000 customers in a large variety of sectors such as the home, personal care, food, coatings, base oils and rubbers, construction, agriculture and automotive industries. Established in 1974, Neochimiki has grown to become one of the largest Greek companies active both in chemicals distribution and production and is currently rapidly expanding into surrounding geographies with a particular focus on the high growth Balkan markets.

@@@@@

ΔΕΝ ΓΡΑΦΟΥΜΕ ΤΗΝ ΕΙΔΗΣΗ ΑΥΤΗ ΤΥΧΑΙΑ.

ΕΔΩ Η ΚΥΒΕΡΝΗΣΗ ΠΟΥΛΑΕΙ ΤΑ ΠΕΡΙΟΥΣΙΑΚΑ ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ ΤΟΥ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΟΥ ΛΑΟΥ

ΚΑΙ ΜΕΙΣ ΑΣΧΟΛΟΥΜΕΘΑ ΜΕ ΤΗΝ "ΝΕΟΧΗΜΙΚΗ"?

ΚΑΠΟΙΟΣ ΙΔΙΩΤΗΣ ΤΗΝ ΕΧΕΙ ΚΑΙ ΤΗΝ ΠΟΥΛΑΕΙ.

ΣΗΜΑΣΙΑ ΕΧΕΙ ΓΙΑ ΤΟΝ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΚΟ ΛΑΟ

ΠΟΙΟΣ ΤΗΝ ΑΓΟΡΑΣΕ.

ΙΔΟΥ ΛΟΙΠΟΝ ΜΕΡΙΚΑ ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ

ΓΙΑ ΤΗΝ

CARLYLE GROUP:

David M. Rubenstein

David M. Rubenstein personal relations:

Other current David M. Rubenstein relationships:

David M. Rubenstein past relationships:

Source: John Byrne of Raw Story:

A private security firm managed by former Secret Service officers spied on myriad environmental organizations throughout the 1990s and the year 2000, thieving documents, trying to plant undercover operations and collecting phone records of members, according to a new report.

Documents obtained by James Ridgeway, a Mother Jones correspondent formerly with the Village Voice, reveals the contractor collected confidential internal records -- donor lists, financial statements -- even Social Security numbers, for public relations outfits and "corporations involved in environmental controversies."

Beckett Brown International also offered "intelligence" services to the Carlyle Group, the controversial DC-based investment company; "protective services" for the National Rifle Association; "crisis management" for the Gallo wine company and for Pirelli; "information collection" for Wal-Mart.

"Also listed as clients in BBI records," Ridgeway reveals: "Halliburton and Monsanto."

Like other firms specializing in snooping, Beckett Brown turned to garbage swiping as a key tactic. BBI officials and contractors routinely conducted what the firm referred to as "D-line" operations, in which its operatives would seek access to the trash of a target, with the hope of finding useful documents. One midnight raid targeted Greenpeace. One BBI document lists the addresses of several other environmental groups as "possible sites" for operations: the National Environmental Trust, the Center for Food Safety, Environmental Media Services, the Environmental Working Group, the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, and the Center for Health, Environment and Justice, an organization run by Lois Gibbs, famous for exposing the toxic dangers of New York's Love Canal. For its rubbish-rifling operations, BBI employed a police officer in the District of Columbia and a former member of the Maryland state police.

Taco Bell genetic corn fiasco

The documents reveal spy thriller-like absurdities: a spy job on groups that had discovered Kraft's Taco Bell was using genetically-engineered corn not approved for human consumption and planned to make a fuss. A former Secret Service agent working for the company emailed another man on the payroll -- an erstwhile Maryland police officer.

Received a call from Ketchum yesterday afternoon re three sites in DC. It seems Taco Bell turned out some product made from bioengineered corn. The chemicals used on the corn have not been approved for human consumption. Hence Taco Bell produced potential glow-in-the-dark tacos. Taco Bell is owned by Kraft. The Ketchum Office, New York, has the ball. They suspect the initiative is being generated from one of three places:

1. Center for Food Safety, 7th & Penn SE

2. Friends of the Earth, 1025 Vermont Ave (Between K & L Streets)

3. GE Food Alert, 1200 18th St NW (18th & M)

#1 is located on 3rd floor. Main entrance is key card. Alley is locked by iron gates. 7 dempsters [sic] in alley—take your pick.

#2 is in the same building as Chile Embassy. Armed guard in lobby & cameras everywhere. There is a dumpster in the alley behind the building. Don't know if it is tied to bldg. or a neighborhood property. Cameras everywhere.
#3 is doable but behind locked iron gates at rear of bldg.

Taco Bell has also raised the heckles of activists for the price it paid those who produced its tomatoes. After a protracted campaign by a Florida group, the firm agreed to pay an extra penny for each pound of tomatoes it buys from farm workers.

The company took three years to increase their payment per pound by a cent, which they did in 2005.

Taking out Greenpeace's trash

An eyewitness described a 'black op' on Greenpeace, one of the world's largest environmental activist groups.

"It was Mission Impossible-like," the witness remarked. The firm collected internal reports from Greenpeace's garbage. They attempted to crack the codes on the organization's front doors.

Technically, the firm has dissolved. But they're not down and out.

"As for BBI's principals," Ridgeway writes, "they are still operating. Tim Ward now runs a security firm called Chesapeake Strategies, which bills itself as 'a multinational security and investigative firm comprised of professionals with extensive security experience.' Jay Bly works there. Its website boasts that it maintains affiliated offices in Paris, Beijng, Tokyo, Qatar, and Kuwait and that 'many team members continue to hold Secret and Top Secret government security clearances.'

***

James Ridgeway, Mother Jones: Cops and Former Secret Service Agents Ran Black Ops on Green Groups

Meet the private security firm that spied on Greenpeace and other environmental outfits for corporate clients. A tale of intrigue, infiltration, and dumpster-diving.


By James Ridgeway
Additional reporting by David Corn, Jennifer Wedekind, Daniel Schulman, and Nick Baumann

April 11, 2008

A private security company organized and managed by former Secret Service officers spied on Greenpeace and other environmental organizations from the late 1990s through at least 2000, pilfering documents from trash bins, attempting to plant undercover operatives within groups, casing offices, collecting phone records of activists, and penetrating confidential meetings. According to company documents provided to Mother Jones by a former investor in the firm, this security outfit collected confidential internal records—donor lists, detailed financial statements, the Social Security numbers of staff members, strategy memos—from these organizations and produced intelligence reports for public relations firms and major corporations involved in environmental controversies. . . .