Replies

"...question of Gaffney's motivation ( Boeing funded think-tank, neocon positions with-in the conservative movement...) "

And so you rely on cited Mother Jones leftist "evil military industrial complex" positions introduced "with-in the conservative movement" (as represented by FR)?

To proove what? -- that the President, the Secretary of Defense, etc., have seem fit to appoint "17" of Gaffney's Board and house network to senior appointive positions (actually now over two dozen I think; see Gaffney's annual report on line)? All or most all of whom are former Reagan Admin officials, conservatives, not "neo" anything.

Boeing? Gaffney's group, now 16 years old has on average received 14% and never more than 17% from all businesses (a category which is not just defense, but including peple like Regnery, and certainly not just Boeing by a long shot, over all that time).

And who anyway would you expect might fund a security policy think tank, and in much greater amounts one would expect?

And by comparison, what percentage of the Islamic Institute's money over its short existence has come from foregin governments and Saudi front groups (related to terrorism not US military equipment supplier)? 14 %, 24% 5o %. No, somewhere close to 95%. So what does that tell you, using your standard/logic, about Norquist's "motivations?" -- and Sauffuri's.

And last, what about the hundreds of thousands of dollars anually Grover gets from uberlobyyist Jack Abramoff to shill for his clients [[see Wall street Journal]]. These are US Indian tribe casinos, Microsoft, Channel One, Mariannas, The Islamic Republic of Pakistan, to name just a few.

Other corporate interests pay Norquist directly. Microsoft has paid Norquist $150,000 a year, ATR pays him only $120,000 Phillip Morris chips in too -- so is Grover spending more time doing software export decontrol and internet coalitions, cigarettes, gambling, Islamists or taxes?

Not to mention the companies that pay ATR to be part of this backroom lobby access to WH tax, energy bill, trade and other efforts with Rove, et al.

And not to mention the over 100 clients of the lobbying firm Grover co-founded according to National Journal (the definitive journal of record for the lobbying business) Janus-Merritt -- an involvement Norquist has long sought to hide and downplay , and through which Alamoudi and Barzingi, two terror finance implicated Islamists, paid tens of thousands additional in the late 1990's.

I find all that a more interesting question that what Gaffney does for a living and who contributes to same, all of which has been consistently transparent and productive and clearly in the national security interests of the United States. How about you?

See, EF, you can smoke these phonies out if you go after one of their own.

Ike (that would a Republican) first employed the phrase Military Industrial Complex, and if Mother Jones provides an on-line source to point out that Gaffney not only has his own agenda but when he was shilling for the Boeing Leasing deal, he 'forgot' to mention that he receives his paycheck in large part because of Boeing contributions.

I have little time for Norquist, even if I thank him for his work on eliminating the death tax and fighting against the Patriot Act, but believe he is just another insider not to be trusted with much of anything.

Gaffney cares more about securing government contracts for his benefactors than national security. He is a true phony, a minion of the War Bucks crowd.