RN: Will our media report these stories?


Jan Slakov

Date: Fri, 07 May 1999 18:02:36 -0700
From: Sid Shniad <•••@••.•••>
Subject: For globalism to work

"For globalism to work, American can't be afraid to act like the almighty
superpower that it is....The hidden hand of the market will never work
without a hidden fist — McDonald's cannot flourish without McDonnell
Douglas, the designer of the F-15.  And the hidden fist that keeps the
world safe for Silicon Valley's technologies is called the United States
Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps."

        -- "What the World Needs Now," Thomas Friedman, New York Times, 
                March 28, 1999
From: "Carolyn Ballard" <•••@••.•••>
Subject: Fw: Will Our Media Tell Us This?
Date: Thu, 6 May 1999 15:45:50 -0400
 From: Ed Haynes <•••@••.•••>
 To: •••@••.•••; •••@••.•••
 Subject: Will Our Media Tell Us This?
 Date: Thursday, May 06, 1999 12:23 PM
SERMEISS Members:  This item comes from the London INDEPENDENT, through a 
faculty member at University of Houston.  I would only add that it is Ms 
Albright and her allies who craft our foreign policies, and they who see 
bombing as a major tool of foreign policy.  Mr Clinton apparently gives 
certain actions priority in terms of his perception of American domestic 

John A. Williams


From: •••@••.••• (Herb Rothschild)

Date: Wed, May 5, 1999, 1:49 PM

No doubt this testimony to the folly of Bill Clinton's chief tool of
foreign policy--just bomb anyone you don't like as long as they are too
weak to bomb you back--will not make the evening news in the U.S.

US admits Sudan bombing mistake
The Independent(U.K.)
5/4/99 Andrew Marshall in Washington
In an admission that last year's missile attack on a factory in
Sudan was a mistake, the US has cleared the man who owned the plant of any
links to terrorism.
The embarrassing reversal means that the US has virtually no
evidence to support its claim that the missile attack was a strike against 
terrorism.  Most of those who have investigated the case have concluded 
that the US acted on faulty intelligence and that key procedures were 
overriden by officials in the White House. The affair is already the 
subject of congressional inquiries and may result in the departure of some 
senior White House officials.
America launched cruise missiles against targets in Afghanistan and
Sudan in August last year after bomb attacks on its embassies in Nairobi
and Dar es Salaam. It blamed the bombings on Osama bin Laden, the former
Saudi who it accuses of backing many attacks on US targets. It said that
the pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum was linked to Mr bin Laden and was used to
produce chemical weapons.
The US was forced to admit within hours that the plant was not a
Sudanese government facility, but a private factory belonging to Salah
Idris, a Saudi businessman. But it then said that Mr Idris was himself
linked to terrorism and to Mr bin Laden. It froze all of his bank accounts,
including money held at Bank of America in London. Yesterday, with no
public announcement or fanfare, it unfroze the accounts, admitting that no
evidence existed to accuse Mr Idris.
Mr Idris hired Akin, Gump Strauss, Hauer & Feld, a top Washington
law firm, to press his case. He sued Bank of America and the US government,
and hired Kroll Associates, the top private investigators, to clear him.
Kroll found no evidence of any links between Mr Idris and Mr bin Laden. 
Yesterday, the US was due to reply to Mr Idris's law suits, but instead 
chose to retreat and unfreeze the accounts. "Today's order lifting all 
restrictions on the Bank of America accounts also effectively removes any 
suggestion that Mr Idris has, at any time, maintained a relationship with 
Osama bin Laden or any terrorist group or organisation," said Akin, Gump 
in a statement.
Spokesmen for Mr Idris said they were "jubilant," but that there 
could still be a law suit to recover compensation.
"I am grateful that the United States has taken the honourable
course and has corrected, in part, the serious harm that has been done to
my family and our good name," said Mr Idris yesterday from Sudan. "While 
I understand that the United States must wage a vigorous fight against 
terrorism, in this case a grave error has been made."
Britain never supported the idea that Mr Idris had links to Mr bin
Laden,and he was permitted to enter and leave London (where he maintains a
flat) freely.
The widespread view outside the US was that the White House had
insufficient evidence for the attack.
From: "Carolyn Ballard" <•••@••.•••>
Date: Fri, 7 May 1999 19:45:00 -0400

Deseret News Archives,
Monday, May 3, 1999 

The government's secret Y2K plans 

By Jack Anderson, and Jan Moller 
The story our government doesn't want you to know was broken not by a major
TV network or national newspaper. It was encapsulated instead by a
front-page picture, which ran in February on the front page of a small
Virginia paper called "The Potomac News."
Captioned "Y2K riot training," the photo depicted a Marine private trying
to "force herself backward through a line of Marines during a civil unrest
exercise at Quantico Marine Corps base" outside Washington.
In this case, unfortunately, a picture was not worth a thousand words. In
fact, a Quantico spokesman denied the story and says the Marines were not,
in fact, preparing for civil unrest. But the reporter (and photographer),
Dave Ellis, stands by his story.
"They told me what the exercise was about and then asked me not to report
it," he told us. "(The Marines) were worried that people would think they
were painting helicopters black and training for a huge government
crackdown at the millennium."
Such is the great dilemma behind preparation for the phenomenon know as
Y2K: No one knows exactly what will happen to our technologically dependent
lives when computer dates roll forward from "99" to "00" at midnight on
Dec. 31. Yet planning for the worst-case scenario carries the danger of
inciting panic and becoming a self-fulfilling prophesy.
This might explain why most military folks we talked to claimed no
knowledge of any Y2K-specific preparations. But we have learned that the
U.S. military is quietly planning a sophisticated social-response network
in case civil unrest should erupt. It was confirmed to us recently by Sen.
Robert Bennet, R-Utah, who chairs a special Y2K Technology Problem
"This problem is everywhere and nowhere all at once," Bennett told us. "We
can only take a snapshot of portions of infrastructure and attempt to
provide the most accurate information we can. But there is simply not
sufficient time to understand where all the problems are going to surface,
so we must be practical and prepare for the worst."
In the worst-case scenario, public alarm spreads rapidly as vital services
such as health care, public safety and utilities are temporarily disrupted
by computer breakdowns. The stress, of course, is on "temporary." Most
experts suggest that people prepare for Y2K like they might prepare for a
winter storm.
Thomas Barnett, director of the Y2K security project, says his team has
been coaching every branch of the military -- indeed even the Marines --
since last fall, planning drills and simulating Y2K breakdowns. Just this
week, Barnett plans to take some military and FBI people to the World Trade
Center to develop possible responses to a stock market crash.
Later this month, the Federal Emergency Management Agency will also hold a
national "table top" simulated scenario drill -- similar to the "war games"
played out in the military -- which will pull together all emergency and
military resources. FEMA, along with the National Guard, is responsible for
coordinating state and local responses to Y2K problems while the State
Department will cover international social problems.
But it is a small agency within the FBI, quietly created by Janet Reno
recently, that will be the federal authority for any national Y2K
repercussions. The agency, The National Domestic Preparedness Office, is
now up and running -- and preparing -- despite the fact they don't
officially exist; Congress has yet to approve its budget.

© 1999 Deseret News Publishing Co.