NEW YORK, Sept. 17, 2007
Greenspan Backtracks On Iraq War Oil Claim
The Skinny: Former Fed Chief Now Says Oil Wasn't The Reason For U.S. Invasion.
-
Alan Greenspan, talking to 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl. (CBS)
-
Play CBS Video Video Greenspan On Housing Crisis Part 1: Alan Greenspan speaks with Leslie Stahl about his tenure at the Federal Reserve and admits that he did not foresee warning signs of a sub prime mortgage meltdown.
-
Video Greenspan On Past & Future Alan Greenspan sits down with Leslie Stahl and reflects on the six presidents he worked with, and discusses the future of the U.S. economy and the crippled housing market.
- Video Greenspan On Mortgage Meltdown
Only On The Web: Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan speaks with Leslie Stahl about the crippled housing market and its effect on the U.S. economy.
-
Photo Essay Greenspan-ing The Decades Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, 79, retires after 18½ years as head of the central bank.
There's not much in government to cheer Alan Greenspan these days.
The former Fed chief may think Hillary Clinton is "very smart" and that President Bush went to war for oil, as he told CBS News' 60 Minutes last night, but he's not any more thrilled with the Democratic Party than the Republicans, he told the Wall Street Journal.
The Goldwater-loving libertarian had nice things to say about the centrist Clinton administration's fiscal politices, but said "the next administration may have the Clinton administration name but the Democratic party ... has moved ... very significantly in the wrong direction," referring to the Democratic party's populist bent, particularly its skepticism of free trade, the Journal reported.
He also (cheerily) put the current odds of the U.S. economy slipping into a recession at better than one in three.
The two other newspapers benefiting from Greenspan's memoir-hawking rounds took away a slightly different messages from their interviews.
The Washington Post focused on the charge in Greenspan's book that "the Iraq war is largely about oil."
The fiscal guru backed off that assertion by suggesting that while securing global oil supplies "was not the administration's motive," it should have been.
He said than when he made the argument that ousting Saddam Hussein was "essential" because of the threat he posed to U.S. oil interests in the region, White House officials told him "Well, unfortunately, we can't talk about oil."
The New York Times zeroed in on the lifelong Republican's unhappiness with the Bush administration's lack of fiscal discipline.
"I'm just very disappointed," he told the Times "glumly" from his living room. "Smaller government, lower spending, lower taxes, less regulation - they had all the resources to do it, they had the knowledge to do it, they had the majorities to do it. And they didn't."
U.S. Ambassador To Iraq Warns Of Refugee Crisis
For a long time, the Bush administration hasn't wanted to talk about the growing Iraqi refugee crisis, either, but today the Washington Post reports that the U.S. ambassador to Iraq has made bleak predictions that are forcing debate.
In a bluntly worded State Department cable titled "Iraqi Refugee Processing: Can We Speed It Up?" Ambassador Ryan Crocker warned that it may take the U.S. government as long as two years to process and admit the nearly 10,000 Iraqi refugees referred by the United Nations for resettlement in the United States, because of bureaucratic bottlenecks.
He claimed the Department of Homeland Security had only a handful of officers in Jordan to vet the refugees. The Bush administration disputed several of his claims.
About 2 million Iraqis are displaced inside Iraq, and an estimated 2.2 million more have fled to Syria, Jordan and other neighboring countries, according to the U.N. But with 60,000 Iraqis fleeing their homes each month, Jordan has closed its borders to Iraqis earlier this year, and Syria announced yesterday that it will begin requiring visas for Iraqis at the end of Ramadan next month.
The U.S. is blaming the U.N. for the delays, and vice versa. Senator Ted Kennedy is expected to proposed legislation next week to expand visas and resettlement programs for Iraqis. "While we can't solve the problem alone," he said, "the least we can do is our part to allow those at risk to resettle here." Which sounded a little like: since that whole bringing-our-democracy-to-Iraqis thing didn't really work out, let's try bringing Iraqis to our democracy.
Good Fences Make Empty Coffers
The immigration debate is revving up again in Congress, and with it cries for more money to build walls along the Mexican border. Anyone in favor of solving to immigration problem with a border wall ought to read
The paper reports that the "battered ribbon of carbon-steel wire-mesh finding" that divides much of San Diego from Mexico, which "helped inspire the Bush administration's plans for more than 700 miles of new fincing along the porous, 2,100-mile southwestern border," has seen much better days.
Illegal immigrants and drug runners have gashed the barrier repeatedly, sending maintenance costs projections skyrocketing to $8.3 million a mile by 2016.
"When people talk about fencing the border, it's amazing they don't have a concept about what it take to do it," said Rep. Silvestre Reyes of Texas, the democratic chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. He called the idea of fencing off more of the border - already set in motion by last year's congressional approval of $1.2 billion to begin construction on the 700 miles of fencing -- "ludicrous" and a "waste of taxpayers' money."
The number of illegal immigrants nabbed at the border has declined during the past three years - from 1.17 million to 889,000 - as security has increased along the southwestern border, the paper reports. But in the San Diego sector, the numbers increased during that time by 20,000 apprehensions.
Illegal immigrants carry flexible ladders they can carry easily and throw over arched portions of the fence that need to be higher, according to Master Sgt. Michael Drake, spokesman for the California National Guard, who described the work to secure the border as a "bottomless pit."
"When there is a pot of gold on the (U.S.) side, they are gonna try to find it," he said. "We're not gonna solve it, and it's easy to have a sense of frustration."
A NOTE TO READERS: The Skinny is available via e-mail. Click here and follow the directions to register to receive it in your inbox each weekday morning.
©MMVII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.
More From CBS Evening News: The Skinny
Add a Comment See all 73 Comments
- weapons of mass destruction huh? and it wasnt oil, nor was it to crush some crush some terroist group!!Mr. president? get our kids out from the hell over there!!!
- Reply to this comment
- VOTE FOR RON PAUL A REAL AMERICAN
If You Google Ron Paul
http://www.youtube.com/user/RonPaul2008dotcom
Meet Ron Paul: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/ronpaul.htm
DEPLETED URANIUM ALERT!
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/DU.htm
Then ''MAKE SURE'' your vote is counted!
http://www.votersunite.org/
HOW TO IMPEACH A PRESIDENT
Includes 6 part videos: ''The Case for Impeachment''
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/impeach_pres.htm
Veteran''s and Family Members exposed to DU Go Here: http://www.naav.com/
Here is who controls America Learn What you never were supposed too about the bankers:
Secrets of The Federal Reserve: It is a Corporation!
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm
EVERYTHING including the truth about 9/11 Check it Out! http://www.apfn.org/apfn/sitemap.htm - Reply to this comment
- Isn''t a real shame what this country has come too. All political leaders and special interest groups and lobbyist groups should be put on trial. The only way any of this will ever change is a REVOLUTION by the people of America. But the people have had there mind and sould degraded to such a level they just don''t care anymore, because they are overwhelmed paying there bill with the high interest rates from the bankers and high taxes which are only going to keep increasing the Federal Reserve and The Tax Act was a Fraud on the American People anyways. But hey who cares anymore? Honest Abe would be rolling in his grave. America needs to get a heart and mind back. Remember government should be afraid of the people not the other way around. If you care take a stand and do something! Stop being supressed by the government, media and corporations like we have been for the past 100 years. Actions speak louder than words.
http://www.apfn.org
http://thetruth07.110mb.com - Reply to this comment
- I wonder what people''s attitude will be if we have another "1974 boycott", long gas lines, unemployment and a recession? I''ll be willing to bet they will then expect the government to get some oil !!
- Reply to this comment
- This is a gentlemen that is famous for selecting his words very carefully.
Very similar to Karl Rove who was famous for his almost photograpic memory suddenly failing to recall so many events in the Plame scandal.
Remarkable! - Reply to this comment
- Oil for Blood no other way to spin it. And Bush is disliked because he is an incompetent, arrongant, swaggering, probably criminal President, who has made amoral decision for political power with support from a minority of Americans and attacked, yes attacked in his rhetoric, policies, drunken spending the majority of Americans who are in the middle and to the left. He ruled for the Right and failed to represent 70 percent of America in doing so.
Do not delude your self America will never thank Bush for Invading Iraq and securing the flow of oil it has only delayed the withdrawal that will place our country back on a prosperous ethical footing they will call if for what it is Blood for oil and the beginning of the decline of America as a Super Power.
He will go down in histroy as a fail man and President. - Reply to this comment
- Now to conclude. Was it necessary maybe, maybe not. But eventually we would have had to deal with him as a leader of a country or later if Iraq would have joined up with groups to make them and even greater threat. If anyone doubts this then they do not know history. Look at the history of the world for the last 2300 years. If someone has something and others need it then there is a war. At least if and when Iraq stabilizes there is a greater chance for negotiating what the world needs, Oil. If ya think gas prices are high now, imagine if Sadam joined with the other oil producing nations and decided to put a restricion on oil. This war does suck but so does every war that has ever occured. Our dependance is a black gold stranglehold but what are the options. Burn coal to make electricity to charge our cars, Use solar power to get trucks and trains across the US and deliver your nikes. Or how about making nuclear cars. The advatage I guess is you would never need a light cause we all would glow. If ya hate the war and complain that it is because of oil then live a day without your SUV and read about the history of the middle east.
- Reply to this comment
- People hate bush cause he did what needed to be done. The congress gave him the power, we elected him, and were all for him going after osama. Osama trained personal in iraq in the past and during the gulf war Sadam used wepons both chemical and biological. He agreed to a cease fire and that is why GHW bush didn''t go after him into Iraq long ago. Many supported him to do so and the response was that was not within the scope of the military action. When Sadam failed to comply with inspectors and was circulating (as told by one of his on red guard) rumors that he had WMD''s what do you do. Why did he do this to keep Iran at bay cause he was ticking them off by messing with oil markets. Do I also need to mention Sadam''s sons who were taking a more active role in the government and would one day replace their father. Or how about the special envoy''s that came to the US, and asked for help in obtaining their freedom. Sadam only was in power because he took over by force and finally was forced out. Is it wrong maybe but the Iraqi citiizens or gangs or tribes or whatever are helping with the ousting of the Taliban that is trying to take over everything or maybe they were already there and we helped people find a backbone and stand up for themselves and the future of Iraq. I don''t like that we are in a war but if someone wouldn''t have been there for us then the US would be a nation of colonies to this day and maybe slavery would still be legal but the slaves would be of many nations.
- Reply to this comment
- People hate bush cause he did what needed to be done. The congress gave him the power, we elected him, and were all for him going after osama. Osama trained personal in iraq in the past and during the gulf war Sadam used wepons both chemical and biological. He agreed to a cease fire and that is why GHW bush didn''t go after him into Iraq long ago. Many supported him to do so and the response was that was not within the scope of the military action. When Sadam failed to comply with inspectors and was circulating (as told by one of his on red guard) rumors that he had WMD''s what do you do. Why did he do this to keep Iran at bay cause he was ticking them off by messing with oil markets. Do I also need to mention Sadam''s sons who were taking a more active role in the government and would one day replace their father. Or how about the special envoy''s that came to the US, and asked for help in obtaining their freedom. Sadam only was in power because he took over by force and finally was forced out. Is it wrong maybe but the Iraqi citiizens or gangs or tribes or whatever are helping with the ousting of the Taliban that is trying to take over everything or maybe they were already there and we helped people find a backbone and stand up for themselves and the future of Iraq. I don''t like that we are in a war but if someone wouldn''t have been there for us then the US would be a nation of colonies to this day and maybe slavery would still be legal but the slaves would be of many nations.
- Reply to this comment
- Regarding the post of : BobECBS
Greenspan is - Not Backtracking on anything ! !
Same old Republican (Nazi) Party B.S.
Prior to The War :
The Initial Reports given by - Bush - The CIA and The FBI
Were Purposely and Intentionally - Fabricated and were Fraudulent ! !
Fabricated Reports - Intentionally - Delivered to the American people
In order to- Falsely and Fraudulently - Advocate a War ! !
The FBI - The CIA - The Bush Administration - Exposed ! ! !
It was Simply - a Matter of Time - If not Greenspan - Then someone else.
The FBI does - Have a History of : Intimidation and Blackmail
The Evidence Speaks for it-Self ! ! !
Greenspan is - Not Backtracking on anything ! !
Same old Republican (Nazi) Party B.S.
Lastdance - Reply to this comment
- First Secretary Gates learns how to Moon Walk and now Alan Greenspan learns how to Moon Walk too, I thought the dance was dead!
- Reply to this comment
jimfinster,
That was very funny!;-)
Thanks for the laugh. I needed that.- Reply to this comment
- "Greenspan Backtracks On Iraq War Oil Claim"
Yes, I bet he did. After a crew from Blackwater USA paid him a visit and explained how things work... - Reply to this comment
- It''s about the OIL, JUST AS WE SAID IT WAS FOR YEARS FROM THE GET-GO, THANKS GREENSPAN FOR CONFIRMING THAT!!!!
- Reply to this comment
- Iraq owns their oil. They can sell to whomever they want.
Oil has always been a factor in the reasons for the Iraqi invasion. Instability in the Middle East which interferes with oil production could plunge the world into global economic depression. Saddam started two wars previously and showed no sign that he wouldn''t start another one, so the weapons he had, and the weapons he would have developed but for inspections and the invasion, would have probably been used on a neighbor.
Greenspan''s comments just point out that the economic fears (relating to the oil supply) were (in his opinion) a good enough reason to overthrow Saddam''s regime. That was always a part of the justifications, along with inability to monitor his weapons development (because of his refusal to fully honor the cease-fire agreement from the Gulf War) and the brutality of his regime. There''s nothing new in Greenspan''s comments when taken in context. It''s just the usual crappy reporting and analysis. - Reply to this comment
- Of course Greenspan backtracks, when I first read the original statement aboit the oil grab, I knew Bush''s boyz wouldnt let him say that. Bush''s people read him the riot act, so now he punks out.
If he didn''t know at the beginning what most of us who remember Vietnam did, he now knows that oil was just the icing of the cake, and the real money was from the war profiteers Bechtel and Halliburton, stealing the future. - Reply to this comment
- Alan Greenspan : "Iraq War - was Really for Oil"
America''s elder statesman of Finance, Alan Greenspan, has shaken the :
White House - By declaring that the Prime Motive for the War in Iraq was Oil.
In his long-awaited memoir, Greenspan, a Republican whose 18-year tenure as
Head of the US Federal Reserve was widely admired,
Greenspan says : %u201CI am saddened - and - It is Politically inconvenient to
Acknowledge - The Iraq War is Largely about Oil,%u201D
America have always insisted the War had nothing to do with Oil.
Bush said the War was about - Weapons of Mass Destruction
___
What this means is : Prior to The War
The Initial Reports given by - Bush - The CIA and The FBI
Were Purposely and Intentionally - Fabricated and were Fraudulent ! !
Fabricated Reports - Intentionally Delivered to the American people
In order to- Falsely and Fraudulently - Advocate a War ! !
The FBI and the CIA have Always worked on Behalf of
the Political and Financial Objectives of : The Republican (Nazi) party
The Federal Drug Smuggling - Drug Manufacturing Operations
Criminal Wiretaps - Criminal Surveillance Techniques
The Child - S*E*X - Slave Operations
The Political - Intimidation and Blackmail Operations
The Social Security system - Purposely Destroyed
The Education system - Intentionally Destroyed
There was a time - Treason - was a Criminal Act
Lastdance - Reply to this comment
Hi ''ToolMangler'',
That was a good, and timely story.- Reply to this comment
- Posted by george2221
Have you ever read a "balance sheet" a "cash flow sheet". I do not know what companies that you have invested in or your methodology of investing. Their are good companys with solid balance sheets, good cash flow and good earnings. Finding them requires effort and knowledge. - Reply to this comment
- It surprises me that Greenspan decided now to speak up and tell what people have known for years about Bush and the Iraq war, not for Democracy, but for Oil. American soldiers are fighting and dying in Iraq FOR MONEY! And Bush says Congress isn''t supporting the troops because Congress wants to bring the troops home! Someone isn''t supporting the troops all right, its the neocon Republicans in the White House, especially Bush, and Cheney.
And Greenspan, were was he when he was in charge of the Federal Reserve? Why didn''t he open his mouth against Bush and the neocons then? I guess the guy was afraid Bush would send Blackwater after him if he spoke out, but I know a lot of older people who aren''t afraid to speak out; so what was his problem?
SIG HEIL, BUSH!!! - Reply to this comment
Mike Huckabee on GOP "rock stars," 2012, health care reform and more.
