WIKILEAKS: U.S. Fought To Lower Minimum Wage In Haiti So Hanes And Levis Would Stay Cheap

[cory777]

Source: Business Insider

A Wikileaks post published on The Nation shows that the Obama Administration fought to keep Haitian wages at 31 cents an hour.

(This article was taken down by The Nation due to an embargo, but it was excerpted at Columbia Journalism Review.)

It started when Haiti passed a law two years ago raising its minimum wage to 61 cents an hour. According to an embassy cable:

This infuriated American corporations like Hanes and Levi Strauss that pay Haitians slave wages to sew their clothes. They said they would only fork over a seven-cent-an-hour increase, and they got the State Department involved. The U.S. ambassador put pressure on Haiti’s president, who duly carved out a $3 a day minimum wage for textile companies (the U.S. minimum wage, which itself is very low, works out to $58 a day).




Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/wikileaks-haiti-minimum-wage-the-nation-2011-6

---

News that Matters http://activistnews.blogspot.com/

[The Northerner]

1. K&R nt

[boppers]

2. I'd like to see the cables, without spin.

Anybody have a link?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stevenleser]

41. There is nothing wrong with wanting to see proof. The question is, why are you carrying on an

argument from a previous OP into this one? That is against DU rules.

[msanthrope]

147. Proof would show that a Bush appointee was in charge. That doesn't fit the agenda.....

Haiti raised wages to $5 on May, 2009

http://www.haitianalysis.com/2009/5/19/haitian-government-raises-minimum-wage-to-5-50-per-day


Janet Sanderson wasn't replaced until August, 2009--ambassadors need to be Senate confirmed, after all....

But why should facts get in the way of perfectly good Obama rants...

[U4ikLefty]

4. dupe

[Divernan]

15. The cables, all from US embassies are being published in entirety on WikiLeaks site.

http://www.wikileaks.ch/

The Nation pulled the story only temporarily, and has said it will republish it next Wednesday.

http://www.thenation.com/article/161057/wikileaks-haiti-let-them-live-3day
"To accord with the publishing schedule of Haiti Liberté, the piece "Let Them Live on $3/Day," which was briefly posted earlier today will instead be posted on Wednesday, June 8."
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Another Nation article is very informative about the sourcing of this report, and other reports in what is described as a series of groundbreaking, English language articles about US and UN policy toward Haiti.
http://www.thenation.com/article/161009/wikihaiti-nation-partners-haiti-liberte-release-secret-haiti-cables

"The (1,918)cables from US Embassies around the world cover an almost seven-year period, from April 17, 2003—ten months before the February 29, 2004, coup d’état that ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristide—to February 28, 2010, just after the January 12 earthquake that devastated the capital, Port-au-Prince, and surrounding cities. They range from “Secret” and “Confidential” classifications to “Unclassified.” Cables of the latter classification are not public, and many are marked “For Official Use Only” or “Sensitive.”

The cables that form the basis of the articles in this series are being published in their entirety on the WikiLeaks site. However, in some cases, names will be redacted for safety reasons.

While not revealing any intelligence or military operations, and not comprising a complete set of all Port-au-Prince Embassy communiqués, the cables offer a penetrating look into US strategies and maneuvering in Haiti during the brutal coup years (2004–2006) and the period after President René Préval’s election (2006–2010). We see Washington’s obsession with keeping Aristide out of Haiti and the hemisphere; the microscope it trained on rebellious neighborhoods like Bel Air and Cité Soleil; and its tight supervision of Haiti’s police and of the United Nations’ 9,000-man military occupation known as the UN Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH).

What emerges is an extraordinary portrait of Washington’s aggressive management of Latin America’s first sovereign nation—and its bare-knuckled tactics on behalf of US corporate interests there. But the cables also show how Washington’s designs are met with fierce resistance from the Haitian people. And they reveal how Haiti is a key arena for North-South struggle and East-West intrigue. Washington squares off against Caracas and Havana, particularly over oil, while Beijing and Taipei engage in fierce diplomatic arm-wrestling that threatens to derail the UN military mission in Haiti.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[iwishiwas]

25. Thank you for the additional links on this topic. Very informative.

[stevenleser]

42. There is a dispute as to what the cables say. Here is another take

http://www.belpolitik.com/messages.php/34878

Haiti Wikileaks: Biased Analysis of Cables Advances Political Agendas By Stanley Lucas

Earlier this week, thenation.com published two articles analyzing thousands of US cables about Haiti. The Nation announces that it is partnering with Haiti Liberte, managed by American Kim Ives, to release a series of cables, which would no doubt be enlightening.

But what they have done is publish two articles -- “The Petrocaribe Files” and “Let Them Live on $3 a Day” – with biased analysis of the cables and no links to the cables. Everyone will recall that the New York Times released their reporting on the cables, but also released redacted copies of the actual cables.

In the article on Petrocaribe, which is the only article available online, the authors paint a picture of the US bullying the Haitian government into accepting bad oil deals that only profited US oil giants driving President Preval into the arms of Venezuela. Their only evidence in support of that claim is that the US oil companies refused a summons from President Preval to come and discuss purchasing oil from the Haitian government, and the US oil companies ignored a request for detailed information on their operations.

.
.
.
---------------------------------------

I guess we are going to have to see what the cables in question actually say

[Divernan]

64. Your link provides no quotes from cables, let alone examples of biased interpretation.

I have not yet looked up the nearly 2,000 cables relied upon by The Nation on the WikiLeaks site myself, but I trust the reporters and editorial board of The Nation to have vetted their story, more so than I trust your link. The blog article you link to threw out the term "biased analysis" without a single example of either bias or analysis. When I looked up your link, I found that it is a small blog, based in the US, dedicated to Haitian politics, and criticizing certain Haitian politicians. So the blog's bias was obvious. Further, it reported an income of $1 per day.

My question to you, should you have the answer, is what individual(s)/organizations are funding this belpolitik source to which you so confidently assign more integrity than The Nation? Another Haitian politician or political party? A US govt. agency? Business Interests?

[EFerrari]

76. Lucas is from the Haitian oligarchy and has worked with the IRI

which is like a Republican Peace Corps, lol, except with the usual predation and corruption that accompanies Republicans wherever they go.

[Divernan]

84. I just looked up the IRI and posted about them below.

I think Haiti should file an action in the Hague/International Court of Justice against this blatant interference with their country's political process and governance.

[stevenleser]

77. No doubt. Which is why my personal take is, we have to wait to see what the cables actually say nt

[sabrina 1]

185. Anyone who has followed Haiti and the US involvement in

that country, twice backing a coup against its elected president eg, AFTER he raised the minimum wage, is not ONE BIT SURPRISED by these cables.

What was most distressing to those of us who did follow Haiti and the Latin America in terms of US policies there, have been sorely disappointed to see little if any change since we worked so hard to elect Democrats. For me, Haiti and Laten American US policies have been a major issue for a very long time.

I have read some of the cables, and was not surprised to see the references to Venezuela, the efforts to prevent Haiti from benefiting from the offers made by Venezuela. It simply boggles the mind that any decent society could be so completely heartless toward a little nation like Haiti that has suffered so much for so long, mostly BECAUSE of our interference. I just don't get it, I never have.

[EFerrari]

72. This is Stanley Lucas and he has an axe to grind.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Stanley_Lucas

Kim Ives is probably the best reporter on Haiti working. He doesn't try to protect any side in Haiti or out of Haiti, for that matter.

It is a good idea to go straight to the cables, too.

Here's an interview on Amy's show yesterday with Ives and others on this story.
http://www.democracynow.org/2011/6/3/wikileaks_cables_reveal_secret_history_of

[Divernan]

83. Wow! Lucas is one nasty character indeed, and suspected CIA asset.

Thanks so much for the link. Stanley Lucas has a lurid history as the U.S. International REPUBLICAN Institute's (IRI's) Haiti program officer.
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/07/16/haiti_coup/index.html
http://www.democracynow.org/2004/7/20/did_the_bush_administration_allow_a
Did the Bush Administration Allow a Network of Right-Wing Republicans to Foment a Violent Coup in Haiti?

We speak with Max Blumenthal contibutor to Salon.com and author of a new investigative piece that examines the role of the United States in destabilizing the democratically-elected government of Jean Bertrand-Aristide through the International Republican Institute, a federally-funded, nonprofit political group backed by powerful Republicans close to the Bush administration.

U.S. Treasury Undersecretary John Taylor said the United States would contribute $232 million and the Inter-American Development Bank $400 million. But what many people don’t know is that U.S. federal funds have been flowing into Haiti for the past six years. A federally-funded group called the International Republican Institute, or IRI, has funneled some $3 million into Haiti to destabilize the democratically-elected government of Jean Bertrand Aristide.

The IRI, a nonprofit political group backed by powerful Republicans close to the Bush administration, initiated the destabilization of Aristide’s government by imposing harsh sanctions, training Aristide’s political opponents and encouraging them to reject internationally-sanctioned power-sharing agreements. Haiti’s political crisis eventually escalated into violence until Aristide was overthrown in February of this year in what he calls a modern-day kidnapping in the service of a coup backed by the United States.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Lucas was described by Mother Jones magazine as "the scion of a powerful Haitian family with long-standing animosity toward Aristide -- Amnesty International says some family members participated in a 1987 peasant massacre."
http://motherjones.com/politics/2004/11/coup-connection

The New York Times described Lucas as "an avowed Aristide opponent from the Haitian elite, counseled the opposition to stand firm, and not work with Mr. Aristide, as a way to cripple his government and drive him from power."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/international/americas/29haiti.html

And from the OP's link:
Journalist Max Blumenthal said of Lucas: "IRI's program in Haiti has been probably its most bellicose thanks to Stanley Lucas. ... He was schooled in Haiti's finest schools with members of the mulatto elite. At the same time, he comes from a wealthy land owning family close to the Duvalier regime, which ruled Haiti with an iron fist for decades. His family is close to the military. Two of Stanley Lucas's cousins massacred -- organized a massacre of 250 peasants, in 1987, who were protesting for land reform after the Duvalier regime crumbled. ... It was a terrible massacre documented by Amnesty International and described to me by someone who witnessed it firsthand. ... He is a judo master who allegedly trained the military in counter insurgency tactics after the Duvalier regime collapsed. He was hired in 1992. ... When I asked IRI's communications director why he was hired, he refused to tell me why, or what his duties consisted of between 1992 and 1998. A lot of people I spoke to suspect that Stanley Lucas is a CIA asset, including former ambassador -- former U.S. Ambassador in the region."

Blumenthal said that a source of his "who lived with Lucas, working with Lucas, in Haiti, told me he saw documents indicating that while Lucas was working for IRI, he was being paid by Michelle Francois, who was a notorious FRAPH leader. ... lobbied for the opposition to Aristide and managed to tie quite a bit of funding to them and introduced a number of Aristide's most virulent opponents to powerful Republicans in Washington. When IRI's campaign to destabilize Haiti began in earnest in 1998 with a $2 million grant in mostly taxpayer money from the U.S. Agency for International Development, Lucas hosted some of Aristide's most virulent opponents in political training sessions. What he did was he merged all of these disparate groups into one big party called the Democratic Convergence."

Blumenthal added, "At the time, the U.S. Ambassador, who was named Brian Dean Curran, a Clinton appointee, who was a highly respected career diplomat, uncovered evidence that Stanley Lucas was the one encouraging the Democratic Convergence to reject the compromises and to stay out of the democratic process. When he presented this evidence to the U.S. Agency for International Development, and he asked them to block Stanley Lucas from the program, Bush's Assistant Secretary for the Western Hemisphere, Roger Noriega, apparently stepped in, and ... Lucas was barred for four months, but after four months, he was back. ... When Lucas returned to the program, he retaliated against Ambassador Curran. What he did was he spread salacious rumors in Port-au-Prince ... and in Washington about Curran's personal life. ... Lucas threatened two embassy officials and told them they would be fired once the real -- 'real' U.S. policy was implemented."

[EFerrari]

91. Great links! I better read them because it looks like this character

isn't finished yet.

[suffragette]

114. Thanks for posting these links

Really helps to know the history of the people and organizations involved.

[stevenleser]

128. Perhaps, but the part I cited makes sense. We haven't seen the cable. It doesnt matter your

ideology if the proof hasnt been offered.

[Divernan]

129. It's only your statement that the cables are not available on Wikileaks.

And you rely solely on a highly suspect source which claims "biased" analysis, with no example of bias.

I asked you earlier in this thread (post 64) who operates/funds the link you provided. If you don't know, how can you rely on it? If you do know, why are you reluctant to share that information?

[stevenleser]

131. I searched for the cable. Have you? Here is a hint, there are not that many Haiti cables to read.

On edit: Just do a search for the Port Au Prince cables.

This one is not up. Again, did you read the OP? Do you understand what an embargo is in terms of journalism?

[Divernan]

132. You repeatedly refuse to answer my polite, earlier question

And then expect me to answer yours? It doesn't work that way. Was my question too complex for you? What about it don't you understand?

I explained to all the nature of the "embargo" in this particular instance in one of my earlier posts.
http://www.wikileaks.ch /

The Nation pulled the story only temporarily, and has said it will republish it next Wednesday.

http://www.thenation.com/article/161057/wikileaks-haiti...
"To accord with the publishing schedule of Haiti Liberté, the piece "Let Them Live on $3/Day," which was briefly posted earlier today will instead be posted on Wednesday, June 8."
________________________________________________________

That's basically what a news embargo does:
In journalism and public relations, a news embargo or press embargo is a request by a source that the information or news provided by that source not be published until a certain date or certain conditions have been met.

[stevenleser]

136. Is this the question you mean?

"My question to you, should you have the answer, is what individual(s)/organizations are funding this belpolitik source to which you so confidently assign more integrity than The Nation? Another Haitian politician or political party? A US govt. agency? Business Interests?"

I generally do not indulge conspiracy minded questions like this but my answer to you is the same as the one to everyone who has tried to attack the site and author of what I cited. It does not matter to me because the portion that I cited makes sense to me and that is very simply (paraphrased):

"We have not been provided the text of the cable in question."

You can try to assert this person is biased, or that he or the site is funded by the reincarnated zombie colloborations of Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot and that is fine. But the fact of the matter is, I am going to withold judgement until I can get my hands on the cable.

I like facts and none are in evidence.

As to the embargo, did you ever stop to think that the reason Haiti Liberte didnt publish a piece in its last edition and embargoed the Nation was because Wikileaks hasnt officially released this cable yet? Did you try searching for it? I did a search on every Port Au Prince cable released so far and none of them were a hit for this information. I even read through them. Nada.

Again. No facts are in evidence here. Let's see the cable.

[EFerrari]

160. LOL. That's fine.

You go ahead and wait. I'll take Kim Ives word over Stanley Lucas any day on any topic.

Lucas is probably soiling himself right now as he waits for those cables to be published. Frankly, I don't want to deny him the full experience.

[stevenleser]

173. you realize that we dont have anyones word, right?

The article to which you are referring has been pulled and consequently does not exist. The only citation from the CJR doesn't begin to address what is being asserted here.

[EFerrari]

180. I suggest you find out who Kim Ives is and also watch his interview

on Amy's show on Friday before you go on Fox to comment on Haiti.

[snot]

108. Kids, you can search the cables yourselves using a variety of facilities here:

described and linked to at http://wlcentral.org/node/958 .

By the way, to be precise, WL itself has published VERY few cables that were not first redacted and published by one or more of their "partner" publishers; and all of of the publishers together have still not come close to publishing all 250,000 cables.

[stevenleser]

111. The cables in question are either not released yet or have just been released and are hard to find

Read initial link in OP regarding "Embargoed"

[snot]

115. ok, sorry.

[girl gone mad]

125. Alerted.

I can't believe a Democratic forum would allow a right wing terrorist to be quoted as if he were a valid source on par with The Nation.

[stevenleser]

127. LOL, exactly what rulebreak did you cite based on what I posted?

The "Right wing source who didnt say anything particularly offensive or right wing" rule?

The part Lucas wrote that I cited is pretty important. The actual cable being discussed has not been released yet and is not in evidence.

We need to see it before we can draw any conclusions at all. The Nation, for its part, has withdrawn its articles on the subject.

[msanthrope]

137. I think you broke the "Don't Let Facts Interfere with a Perfectly Good Anti-Obama Rant" rule

that some members think is rule # 1.

I can't find the cable, either.

[stevenleser]

143. That is what I am thinking. And look, the administration may deserve some blame here. But we dont

know that yet. See my #138 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1227484#1229624

[msanthrope]

148. The orginal cable would show that a Bush appointee was in charge at the time--see my reply to your

138

[Doremus]

139. Been invited to be a panelist on Fox lately, Steven?

Sorry for going off-topic but I've been wondering for some time if I've missed the threads about your appearances on Fox or they haven't asked you back recently?

Just curious. :)


Carry on ....

[stevenleser]

140. Yes, several times. My 'real' job tends to conflict with afternoon appearances so it hasnt worked

out. But the morning shoots for Russia Today (RT) have worked out better. I've been on RT several times in the last 6 months. Interesting experience in that it is the opposite of Fox News. They WANT me to wallop the right wing guest. Just do a search on me and Russia Today.

Thanks for asking!

[girl gone mad]

155. "Inappropriate source or link"

You're promoting a blogger with ties to right wing terrorists and a strong affiliation with the Republican party. DU rules state that users are only allowed to link to right wing sites provided the intent is to expose their agenda rather than agree with it.

"Democratic Underground permits members to posts excerpts and links from a wide variety of websites, however there are some websites which are not welcome here, including: Websites with a focus on disrupting Democratic Underground and/or smearing DU members. Websites with bigoted content, including Holocaust revisionism/denial, Jewish conspiracies, and the like. (Note: Linking to "mainstream" right-wing websites is usually permitted, provided the intent is to expose their agenda rather than agree with it.) "

You asserted that this content was a factual alternative to the "biased" reporting from The Nation. It is not.

[stevenleser]

171. its apparent that the mods disagree with you.

What I cited isn't the slightest bit right wing or ideological in any way.

It's simply an appeal to wait before the facts are in evidence before going berserk. Rational people tend to find arguments like that compelling.

[UpInArms]

141. seven-year period, from April 17, 2003 - that is NOT the Obama administration

it was more of the same Bushit.

[JackRiddler]

63. That is extremely easy. Go to wikileaks.ch. Access to the cables is the point!

There's a search function that will allow you to see all Haiti cables by date. There are also sites that feature full text searches. The OP consists mainly in quotes from cables, by the way.

So go ahead and tell us what you find -- without presumptions of spin.

[joshcryer]

135. No, as he pointed out, the cable is not yet available, but usually exerpts are quoted...

...so I don't see how the context could be changed unless the exact sentence afterward was "but the US State Department was not involved and I am making that previous sentence up."

[JackRiddler]

159. The cable will be published at wikileaks.ch soon enough, based on track record so far.

Any time I looked for something on which there was a news report it was there within a week, if not right away.

[joshcryer]

161. It takes a week or more, and then, Google won't pick it up for 2-3 days after that.

By then if the story isn't true or is being misconstrued of course it will be dead and no one will care. See: Honduras for an example (only wikileaks you'll find is how the "US backed the coup" though the leak in question does not show that at all). I'm not saying that's happening in this instance, though, it appears that it's more due to a right wing Bush appointee talking out of his ass.

[JackRiddler]

167. Sigh.

The cable shows that the US ambassador identified it correctly as a military coup d'etat.

USG behavior after the first couple of days, contrary to the ambassador's efforts, demonstrated to the world that the US backs the coup.

You repeatedly make a false claim that anyone got that from the cable.

[joshcryer]

170. Not really, read the google search for that particular cable.

They're saying the cable is proof of support for the coup when the cable itself is not in any way. The United States denounced the "coup" immediately, and it took 2 years for Honduras to be recognized again. Read the article, "WikiLeaks expose shows US complicity in Honduran coup." It's everywhere. And it's bullshit.

I am not spreading a false claim whatsoever, it is anyone who claims that the US was complicit in the "coup" when the US denounced it who is making such claims.

[joshcryer]

134. The relevant part of the cable is quoted, so, if it is the actual quote, what spin could there be?

[stevenleser]

138. What is quoted is not particularly convincing. I went to CJR and here is all there is in terms of

direct quotes

http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/a_pulled_scoop_shows_us_booste.php

The Nation:

Still the US Embassy wasn’t pleased. A deputy chief of mission, David E. Lindwall, said the $5 per day minimum “did not take economic reality into account” but was a populist measure aimed at appealing to “the unemployed and underpaid masses.”
-----------------------------------------------------------

That is not exactly what everyone here has been making it out to be. The question(s) I am interested in seeing answered by the actual cable are:

What economic realities was Lindwall talking about? Was it Levis and Hanes, or was $5 generally unrealistic for the Haitian economy

Why did the Haitian government relent? Governments tell the US 'no' all the time. Was pressure applied? Did the Haitian government agree that $5 was unattainable at this time due to economic conditions?

[joshcryer]

144. I think there's enough there to know that the US State Department got involved, though.

You do have a point that of course there could be other economic considerations, and I do admit the wider cable could provide insight on that.

[msanthrope]

149. The US ambassador to Haiti at the time was a Bush appointee....

see, my post # 146.

No wonder we didn't get the original cable, with dates...

[msanthrope]

146. The original cables would show that a Bush appointee was in charge, and that would not fit the anti-

Obama agenda....

Sanderson, the US ambassador, wasn't replaced until August, 2009 by Ken Merten--


Haiti's wages went up in May 2009.

http://www.haitianalysis.com/2009/5/19/haitian-government-raises-minimum-wage-to-5-50-per-day


So, this was a Bush appointee....

[joshcryer]

151. Interesting find, the cables will be released of course.

We'll know the entire story eventually.

[msanthrope]

154. I wouldn't bet on that. I suspect the original cables won't make enough anti-Obama fodder

as the story will.

[joshcryer]

156. I tend to keep tabs of the cables, so if someone else doesn't notice...

...I might do an OP. Embargo's are usually a week or so.

(BTW, I hate it that Wikileaks does it this way, it's hardly transparent at all. The vast majority of the cables are still hidden.)

[msanthrope]

157. I'd appreciate you matching up the dates of the cables, if they are released....

Ken Merten didn't get there until August, 2009, well after the proposed raise.

[seabeyond]

163. i am waiting to actually see the facts instead of an uninformed attack. read the whole subthread

to see if there was enough info to come to the conclusion that obama fucked all of haiti. havent seen any info yet to react the way so many are on this thread.

[joshcryer]

164. Me either.

[Cherchez la Femme]

182. What spin? Who's spin?

These are leaked documents from "the U.S. ambassador", you do comprehend?
Or perhaps you're referring to the "spin" from the The Nation?!

But oh! It's so proved that this administration is completely different from the last one!

Why, for one, this latest redecorated the Oval Office!


61 cents an hour! OMG!
Why, it must take many people DAYS to make one pair of jeans! You know how modern, cost-conscious corporations are soo behind in the latest cutting-edge technology & people-replacing machinery! It's an outrage.
And heck, you'd think those Haitians are just like the U.S.'s predators upon poor, struggling captialists; just like our fat 'n lazy Union Members, Teachers & Government Employees/Civil Servants who are all living so high on the hog, thumbing their rich noses at the *real* working citizens <----those who would simply could not afford to pay an extra 30 cents an hour per N number of jeans constructed!

It's a sin. A SIN.

~~~

If this is what now passes for the U.S. in the New American Century -- I'll be GLAD to be an emigre (and it's coming so very close!), even if I have to endure such travesties in foreign countries as something like Single Payer and a higher standard of living! :cry:



Un -- Believable. :puke:

[No Elephants]

5. If true, shameful, shameful, shameful.

[marasinghe]

6. filthy disgusting scum n/t

[Citizen Worker]

7. The Randroids are no doubt pleased. This is raw unregulated capitalism and this is what happens to

workers in the "free market."

[originalpckelly]

16. It's the difference between centrally planned capitalism and free market capitalism.

When you have 1% of the people controlling 38% of the wealth, the capital. When you have 10% controlling 71% of the capital, then it's not a free market system, it's a centrally planned system.

[Capitalocracy]

22. Except they need the hand of government to protect them.

In a "free market", with no government intervention, people will unionize and organize and fight back. That's why there was a coup in Honduras, to install a fascist government that would use violence to make sure the only ones organizing were the employers, never the employees.

[GeorgeGist]

8. How does Obama sleep at night?

These are the actions of greedy psychopaths.

Is Obama one of them?

Feeble minds won't care.

[SammyWinstonJack]

26. I wondered that when he escalated the war on Afghanistan.

:shrug:

[femrap]

32. He does as he is told....

he figures 'it's just part of my job.' Just like most americans who work for the psychopaths.

[awoke_in_2003]

106. as does all the members of congress...

DC is nothing but a Potemkin village.

[femrap]

122. Yep....

all nicely paid for.

[Cherchez la Femme]

183. Funny that

it was a member of the upper-upper class who instituted the safety nets for 'average American's';
even though that same person never needed nor could ever have need of any of those safety nets.


Could that be the key? Put a person in the Presidency to is SO rich --one who would never have need of the those programs-- into the position?

Or just a dirty, druggie, Socialisst-Communist-Fascist Liberal;
and worse, if possible: one who had a conscience, real morals? and actual empathy!

Ugh!

I'm positive FDR made Ayn Rand cry,
the bastard!
(but not when she got her monthly government stipend checks and continuous, in-full medical care! She may have been evil incarnate, but she wasn't totally stupid!)

[awoke_in_2003]

105. "Is Obama one of them?"

all but maybe a handful of democrats on the hill are.

[Cherchez la Femme]

186. We citizens weren't responsible for what our government did

in our names, prior to Obama?
And that automatically proves that Democrats and this President are completely innocent of any charges such as Corporatism, Free Market, Supply-Side Capitalism and approving slave labor (in not only other poor countries but in the U.S. itself?) with the resuilt of little-to-zero Fair-Market prices in what we are able to purchase?
Of course on revolving credit!

--the few goods the "Average American" can actually afford, of course!

And that the 'American' dream of being a homeowner no longer is pertinent
*unless your home is a tent or a van down by the river!

Nor when government subsidized (via taxpayer dollars, which the wealthy & corporations don't pay) too-big-to-fail banks and Wall Street predators aren't split up so they are no longer Too Big To Fail?
...just setting up the NEXT Recessions/Depression
Hey, no biggie, because that doesn't hurt the people that count: the wealthy;
it just devastates the Poor-to-Middle classes, the taxpayers, so that's A O-K!! :applause:
What do they count anyhow? Answer: Nothing, that's what!
Well, except when it's time to fill our for-profit prisons, or collect taxes, or to-infinity-&-beyond!


It's the *American :patriot:"! way! Yay! :woohoo:



In any event, I guess we "Liberals" & "Democrats" get a Get Out of Jail Free card just like the last administration now we have our guy in the Oval Office!

Good to know!

I Can't Wait!

If I ever get arrested for any crime, I'll just tell the judge and prosecutors that it's now precedent,
from the very highest level,
that we all just Look Forward
it does no good to ever Look Back and blame or point fingers!

Seriously, I just can't wait!

:sarcasm:

[awoke_in_2003]

187. Of course we are responsible...

for what our country has done prior to Obama. But when it comes right down to it, the system is rigged. In all elections, we are given two choices- but both candidates have already been properly vetted, so the PTB get what they want regardless of how we vote. The only thing that will release corporate grip on our government is revolution- and Americans no longer have the stomach for it.

[girl gone mad]

117. He will retire into vast riches..

and his children will never have to do a hard days work.

[Cherchez la Femme]

184. Presidentin' in hard werk

[UpInArms]

142. the cables cover a seven-year period, from April 17, 2003 - not Obama admin

I do so wish that someone would figure out dates and connect the dots - the OP (not the poster) is incorrect.

[Vinca]

9. This is disgusting . . . to put it mildly.

[TheeHazelnut]

10. Everyone chill the f*** out, I got this (boot on the neck of the working man) n/t

[me b zola]

96. ^^This^^

[awoke_in_2003]

107. "If you want a picture of the future...

imagine a boot stamping on a human face- forever". O'Brien in "1984"

[eilen]

11. State Dept. Isn't Hillary the boss there?

Apparently there was not much of a difference btw the 2, both DLC corporate puppets.

[Bluenorthwest]

21. Obama is THE boss. The Executive power is not shared. Sorry.

There never was much difference between them, but he won, he is in charge, she does his bidding. This is what Obama wants for Haiti. Deal with it.

[Fuddnik]

33. More change we can make believe in.

In the service of the corporate empire.

[izquierdista]

35. And they both do the bidding of Hanes and Levi Strauss

There was a reason the Democratic primary had so much drama in 2008. It was carefully scripted into choosing one of the acceptable flavors (old DLC or new DLC), but never allowing for Kucinich, Gravel, or John "Two Americas" Edwards. Apparently John was enough of a threat that they have to make SURE his political career is over, as events this week have shown.

[JackRiddler]

65. Oh really? Could he shut down the military empire, if he wanted to?

Could he open the files on 65 years of CIA covert operations around the world, if he wanted to?

Next time the banks fail, could he announce no bailout and liquidation for the lot, if he wanted to?

Some boss!

[Gregorian]

95. This is really good context.

I think those who are criticizing Obama will get an earful of this next time I hear them saying what Obama should be doing.

There's another facet to it also. When a conservative gets in office, they can get away with murder because it is in the direction the corporations want it. It's just the opposite for a Dem president. The flow is int he direction counter to the corporations and their lobbyists. So one has it easy, the other has it hard.

[JJW]

12. Shame on you, Barack Obama

disgusting & criminal. O proved he is all talk on no cattle, when he couldn't find his pair of soft shoes to join teacher, police men and fire fighters in Wisconsin.

Even Reagan had recognized collective bargaining as an inherent right provided for in the US Constitution.

Who could ever have imagined the first black President would indenture everyone for global corporations who pay no US taxes? Just totally insane.

The article claim the low wages are to keep prices down. Not for the consumer. 31 cents per day for a worker and the jeans are selling for $ 50. Heck of a markup.

[Enrique]

13. Wikileaks is a danger to national security

:sarcasm:

[SixString]

79. And cheap duds.

[originalpckelly]

14. Cheap for whom?

Hanes, yes they are cheap. They are low quality undies for the most part.

But Levis? No, they are not cheap at retail.

Compared to other department store brands, they are only a little less expensive. Regularly at Macy's for example, they cost $50+. For a pair of jeans?

And yet, I bet they didn't even cost half that to make. That's the problem. Just think: How many pairs of jeans can someone working for $3 an hour make in an hour?

How much did it cost to power the factory?
How much did the materials cost?
How much did it cost to get the materials there and then ship the jeans to America?

And if things were getting cheaper because of outsourcing, why would inflation be going up?

Deflation is a lowering of prices, prices have pretty much risen for the last 50 years continuously, actually getting much worse after the collapse of Bretton Woods in '71.

Things are not cheaper for average people in America, just for the fuckers who profit at the top of the system.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

19. cheaper for the fuckers at the top....in a nut shell!

[hfojvt]

55. prices have not risen continually

For one example, I remember I was paying $1.09 for a 2 liter bottle of RC in the 1990s. I bought RC because it was the cheapest pop at that grocery store. And from 1997 until 2009, pop was generally $1 for a two liter bottle. Another example, I bought a Trek bicycle (made in South Korea) in 1991 for $300. Ten years later, I bought another one (made in China) for $300 and then in 2003 I bought another one for $300. Granted, they now seem to have gone up to about $500, but the price was steady for a decade.

Other things like DVD players and digital cameras and computers have gotten much cheaper, as the quality has gone up. More megapixels and faster processers for less money. In 1993, I bought an 8086 (I think it was) for about $1,000. 3% inflation for 15 years would bring the price up to $1,500, but my last desktop cost much less than that.

Another example might be gasoline. When I bought my car in 1996 gas was about $1.30. Then, right after I bought my car it seemed like it went up by 10 cents a gallon or more, but then in the later 1990s it started going down, until it reached 89 cents a gallon were it held until the spring of 2000. Gas has been going up - and down, since. Not just up and up and up.

I did notice one thing at a factory. I would load about 12 boxes, containing about 1,000 cups each, into a machine per hour. I was paid $7.25 an hour plus say $3 an hour to the temp agency. So I cost about $11 an hour. How much did the cups cost? At $5 a box, which seems cheap for 1,000 cups (3 ounce cups though), the cups would be costing $60 an hour - much more than my labor. Which made me think they could bump up my pay by $3 an not add that much to their total costs. It would certainly work for me if they gave me the $2 or $3 an hour and cut out the temp service. Maybe then, though, they would have to pay FICA taxes on that $3, and unemployment insurance, and workman's comp insurance, etc.

[originalpckelly]

74. In general are things more expensive now than they used to be?

That is true, according to the CPI.

Everything on average is more expensive. The only time this didn't occur is when the economy went in the shitter.

[hfojvt]

90. it depneds on the item

things have jumped, it seems to me, in the last two years, but I don't remember the price of everything either. Some of them held steady and some of them have gone down. And some it depends on the product. If I remember correctly, I used to pay more for VCR tapes than I do for DVDs. But that can depend on the title. Another example, my mom turned 70 in 2005, so I can remember buying a McCicken from the $1 menu that year. Six years later, they are still $1. 3% inflation should make them $1.19. Logically, they should perhaps be $1.10 now. At some point in the next decade, they will probably goto $1.25 and people will, naturally, scream bloody murder, even though we enjoyed 0% inflation on them for over a decade or more.

"In general" it depends on what you are buying. Do you remember what we used to pay for film, flash and developing? Now a person can take thousands of digital pictures almost for free. IIRC I was paying about $5 to develop a roll of 24 back in the 1970s. I often buy stuff on sale, or generics. Little Debbie nutty bars, which I buy a fair amount of, back in the 1990s were $1.07 for a box of six. Now generally that box is $1.5, but I can get basically the same thing as a generic for $1 for a box of 6. This over a span of 15 years or more. There are probably other examples if I could remember, or had kept a record. I have no idea what I was paying for milk or bread or rice in the 1980s.

[Hestia]

119. Why are you throwing out RC Cola & "McCicken" sandwiches? What about the cost

of gasoline and real food? How about the cost of a gallon of milk or vegetables, for those of who can't buy locivore items (everything is cotton or soybeans here with heavy spraying)? Who cares about film development? That has gone by the wayside and is not relevant in today's budget.

You want to see the real cost of inflation? I-Bonds just went up to 4.6% composite from a fixed rate in Nov 2010 of 0%, (during the Katrina bump in 2005, I have bonds paying 11% - the savings bond wizard is quite the handy tool). They paid zero percent when Obama was elected. I-Bonds are tied to the CPI. It is amazing to see how much they have gone up in interest. That alone tells me that we are living in greater inflationary times. You think the Feds are going to pay us if they don't have to?

Looks like I am going to have to start buying again. It's a good savings tool for the very small investor. $25-$100 per month, when other funds want to pay $10k or more in and maybe $250 per month.

[Divernan]

126. Thanks for the tip on bonds - 4.6% sure beats my credit union IRAs

[Hestia]

116. 1996 is not a bellweather year - when we discuss inflation, go back even further

to say, 1975 & then 1985 to show the difference between a decade. The 2010s-on is a big continuation of the Clinton years.

[SixString]

82. That's $3 a day.

[xchrom]

17. Recommend

[ElsewheresDaughter]

18. I will NEVER buy products from either of these 2 companies again! and SHAME on Obama!

[TBF]

20. Which totally misses the point -

this is capitalism. These are the behaviors encouraged by capitalism. Until we dump this barbaric economic system there will continue to be stories like this, whether our president is purple, green, or orange in color.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

23. No shit and I will still add these 2 products to my boycott list ....and....

Thank you but, I really didn't need your instructions on what Capitalism is nor how our political system works.

Lose the ego, it really is unattractive.

[BadtotheboneBob]

40. Until we dump this barbaric economic system

...and replace it with what manner of system? You give no alternative. I would be interested to read what you would propose.

[Hissyspit]

24. Nothing new in any of these cables at all!

Move along. Nothing new. All of this has been known by everybody. Thus spake the MSM and Beltway insiders on the very first day.

:sarcasm:

[mdmc]

27. cheap undies designed to keep Americans from working

God Bless the USA

[harun]

28. Corrupt bastards.

[dipsydoodle]

29. ****'s

.

[TatonkaJames]

30. I don't get it ?

Where were they going to go ? Offshore ? Not like they were in the US and we were losing jobs.
Anyway, no one cares, no one's interested because these companies are thriving since we
first saw these practices yeas ago. We're a Stepford Nation.

[femrap]

34. Levis and Hanes employed

thousands of people in the US...I remember when they left.

We're a Cruel Nation led by psychopaths.

If I were Haiti, I'd change my name.

[femrap]

31. Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeez.....

Levis and Hanes are NOT cheap! Raising the minimum wage for the Haitians would have CUT INTO THEIR PROFIT MARGINS.

I don't either of these products because they moved their manufacturing outside of the US.

[bluebuzzard]

36. stand for something or get off the stage

The issue isn't republican/democrat or capitalism/socialism.
THE PROBLEM IS GREED.
"We the People" are at fault because we allow it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf7OkJEmA3c&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdAKKiOP-_M

[Scottybeamer70]

37. and they'll be trying those wages.......

in this country in the not too distant future.

[TNLib]

38. More like: fought to lower minimum wage to keep Haynes and levis profits high

I'm not buying their cloths anymore and I wish our government would get their fucking nose out of other countries. This is why Wi ki leaks and whistle blowers are so needed to shine the light on these corporate cockroaches and our government.

[snot]

109. EXACTLY!

[highplainsdem]

39. Shameful.

[dotymed]

43. Meet the new corporate boss

(of course) same as the old corporate boss.

We need a real Progressive Democrat (Bernie Sanders?) in the White house. Until we get one, or "the masses" rise up against this Corptocracy, we are slaves...,Imagine what Bernie Sanders, a proven Progressive who stands for the people, could do for America.

[Fuddnik]

44. It's shit like this that makes me ashamed to be an American.

The corporations took over when Raygun was President, and they've had their puppets in place ever since.

[Hestia]

121. and their tools are swarming this thread - Little Debbie's & RC Cola + inflation - WTF?

[Hissyspit]

45. Wikileaks Cables: U.S. Worked to Scuttle Haiti Gas Development Deal on Behalf of Big Oil

Source: Think Progress

Wikileaks Cables: U.S. Worked To Scuttle Haiti Gas Development Deal On Behalf Of Big Oil
By Zaid Jilani on Jun 4, 2011 at 7:15 am

Earlier this week, The Nation magazine and the Haitian weekly newspaper Haïti Liberté announced a partnership where by they would work together to publish findings from 1,918 U.S. embassy cables — dated between 2003 and 2010 — from Haiti.

Now, the two papers have released their first article about the cables. In “The PetroCaribe Files,” Dan Coughlin and Kim Ives review an ordeal discovered within the cables involving an oil and development deal Haiti was negotiating with Venezuela and Cuba between 2006-2007.

As a part of the deal struck that year, Haiti would join the Venezuelan-led oil alliance known as PetroCaribe and it would purchase oil “only 60 percent up front with the remainder payable over twenty-five years at 1 percent interest” — a remarkably good deal for the Western hemisphere’s poorest country.

The U.S. embassy at the time noted that Haiti would save a hundred million U.S. dollars a year under the terms of the PetroCaribe deal; the saved dollars would then earmarked for development in schools, health care, and infrastructure. Yet, under the charge of ambassador Janet Sanderson, the embassy immediately set out to sabotage the deal.

Read more: http://thinkprogress.org/security/2011/06/04/236440/wikileaks-haiti-oil/

[dipsydoodle]

46. Rec'd

That is just so digusting.

[The Backlash Cometh]

47. Deplorable.We are suffering for our leader's sins.

[postulater]

48. Government of the, by the, and for the corporations at work.

"the saved dollars would then earmarked for development in schools, health care, and infrastructure."

Oh, yeah, Haiti doesn't really need schools, healthcare and infrastructure right about now. Really?

[iwishiwas]

49. Whow!!

[highplainsdem]

50. K&R

[Fuddnik]

51. Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama, House of Rep, Senate, SCOTUS,

All wholly owned subsidiaries of US Chamber of Commerce.

[ej510]

66. Come on they are negros they don't need wages. You've seen those national geographic clips.

:sarcasm: Black people are considered to be at the bottom of the barrel when it comes to all races, and ethnic groups. We will always be considered lower than garbage.

[rjwin]

98. Don't worry

for every slave that is secured for American Industry there, another worker will be tossed to the margins here, and this is called progress!

[unlawflcombatnt]

52. TARIFFS & the "Competitiveness" Myth

This is why American workers can't "compete" in the global labor market.

It's because we can't survive on $3/day, not because of any lack of jobs skills or education.

American workers' productivity--quantity of goods produced per hour--is 2nd to none.

But we cost more in quantity produced per $.

If American workers make $58/day vs. $3/day for a Haitian workers, Americans would have to almost 20 X as productive to be "competitive" with Haitian workers.

That's impossible if Haitian workers are as well capitalized as American workers. Even if American workers 10 X as productive as Haitian workers, they'd lose this competition.

This isn't a problem that can be fixed by better training, better job skills, or more education.

It's a problem that can only be solved by TARIFFS.

[SemperEadem]

53. note to self: don't buy Hanes or Levis

[JackDragna]

54. As if we needed more evidence of Obama's complicity..

..in the continuance of our fantastic corporate state. I regret voting for the man.

[unlawflcombatnt]

58. Obama always was a Free Trader

That's why I voted for Nader instead.

[Hotler]

56. kicking! n/t

[defendandprotect]

57. Hey, we're a superpower and we can run the world -- !!!

[BOG PERSON]

59. but... but... it's okay because haitians enjoy a lower cost of living!

[BOG PERSON]

61. or: but... but... it's okay because the average haitian garment worker

is nearly twenty times less productive than the average american garment worker.

[votesparks]

60. America....Fuck Yeah

Drivin' down the wages so the Soccer Mom's can rule."

If you want malls and a drive-everywhere culture, populations like Haiti have to fuel it.

[ej510]

62. This part of U.S. imperialism which is responsible for Haiti's demise since the early 1900's.

Over 200 years of U.S. destruction in Haiti and before that France. Poor Haiti, no wonder why they cannot improve their situation.

[EFerrari]

73. It's been our policy since Jefferson. n/t

[ej510]

80. Yeah he followed the British blue print.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

67. ''Let them eat mud pies.''......... No seriously this actually happened. nt

[malaise]

68. No surprise here

:puke:

[bobthedrummer]

69. K&R n/t

[blindpig]

70. So where are the apologists for Capitalism?

This is what Capitalism does, don't matter if Ds or Rs control the executive or legislature.

This is Capitalism.

[ej510]

71. Malcolm X on Capitalism and Socialism

"In his last year of life, before his assassination on February 21, 1965, Malcolm X’s political views evolved towards anti-capitalist positions. “You can’t have capitalism without racism,” he said.

" my opinion, the young generation of whites, Blacks, browns, whatever else there is, you're living in a time of revolution, a time when there's got to be change," Malcolm told a group of British students in 1964. "People in power have misused it, and now there has to be a change, and a better world has to be built, and the only way it's going to be built is with extreme methods. I, for one, will join in with anyone--I don't care what color you are--as long as you want to change this miserable condition that exists on this earth."

He continued: " incorrect to classify the revolt of the Negro as simply a racial conflict of Black against white, or as purely an American problem. Rather, we are seeing today a global rebellion of the oppressed against the oppressor, the exploited against the exploiter."

Asked what he thought was responsible for race prejudice in America, he responded: 'Ignorance and greed. And a skillfully designed program of miseducation that goes right along with the American system of exploitation and oppression.'"

More Continued at the link: http://www2.socialistorganizer.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=248&Itemid=143

[blindpig]

88. Damn straight. n/t

[Starry Messenger]

99. +1

:thumbsup:

[Odin2005]

145. +1,000,000,000,000,000,000

[Octafish]

75. And that's another 'reason' why Aristide had to go.

He also fought the drug-smuggling Haitian generals who serve the 1-percent who own 99-percent of Haiti.

[harvey007]

78. Slave wages in the U.S. too

the U.S. minimum wage has been suppressed for years thanks to The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and Congress.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._minimum_wages

[Vanje]

81. GOD DAMN IT! nt

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Corruption Winz]

87. Who the hell is still buying Levi's? That's the real question. nt

[JDPriestly]

89. This is shameful! For shame! For shame! For shame!

[Shining Jack]

92. K&R and...

Hanes + Levis are now on my boycott list.

[me b zola]

93. ...snd so rwers could "adopt" children of the poor

...so they can have molestables. :(

[raouldukelives]

94. K&R

[girl gone mad]

97. k & r

[BlueIris]

100. Ugly. Really ugly.

Hey, I wrote ugly, not shocking.

[Blue-Jay]

101. Levi jeans used to be awesome. Now they suck.

I'll be goddamned if I ever pay $40-$60 bucks for any of your shit that rips out at the ass after 6 washings.

regards,

A formerly loyal customer

[Iggo]

102. I quit buying Hanes this year and Levi's last year.

Levi's are way too expensive for pants that don't last forever anymore. If I'm paying for pants that'll fall apart in a year-and-a-half, I'm going Wrangler for 15 bucks a pop.

Hanes. Jeez, where do I start? Their sizing is inconsistent on their da-dunt-da-dahs. Even from pair to pair in the same package. Even down to different size LEG HOLES on the SAME GODDAM PAIR!

[Lucian]

103. This makes me absolutely sick.

K&R. Everyone needs to read this.

:puke:

[WillyT]

104. Don't It Make Ya PROUD ???

:puke:

:mad:

:kick: & Rec !!!

[msanthrope]

152. I makes me proud that Obama replaced the Bush appointee on whose's watch this was sent out.

You see, some of us recall that the Haitian ambassador at the time of the wage increase was Janet Sanderson....a Bush appointee.

Ken Merten, Obama's pick, was awaiting Senate confirmation.

No wonder the original cables weren't published...they would have pointed to Bush, not Obama....

[EFerrari]

166. Obama hasn't changed the policy on Haiti a lick.

That last election that State manipulated like crazy got a whopping 17% turnout because people were so disgusted with the whole process. The earthquake funds that we all contributed to are not going to help Haitians. And the State Department is deporting Haitians back into a cholera outbreak. Nothing changed there at all.

[msanthrope]

168. So you concede the fact that a Bush appointee was ambassador at the time?

Care to post any cables from the Obama ambassador that back your claim?

Oh, right...not released....

[EFerrari]

169. LOL. You're arguing a point not in dispute.

Typical.

[stevenleser]

174. it wasnt in dispute because no one realized it until misanthrope

Brought it to our attention. So no, it wasnt in dispute because it couldn't have been. We didn't know about it.

One wonders what kind of point you are trying to make here.

[yurbud]

112. I disagree with the last part of the subject line: it was to keep the profit margins wide

When companies moved their factories overseas, the price of their products don't drop--their profit margins just rise.

[Brickbat]

123. Yup. "Keeping prices low" is a goddamn lie. It's to keep profits at the levels they want. "Savings"

never get passed to the consumer.

[yurbud]

178. but they always threaten to pass any new taxes on to us.

[suffragette]

113. Ruthless and appalling repression for profit of a few

K&R

[Brickbat]

118. Which is why if it doesn't say "MADE IN USA," I probably won't buy it. I can buy jeans and socks

that are union-made in the USA. Read every label. EVERY ONE.

[lame54]

120. Talk about a govt hand-out...

except this time it's the back of the hand

why are we paying for Hanes and Levi's negotiations

Sounds like socialism to me

[Javaman]

124. Cheap? I buy both those brands and they haven't "stayed cheap" at all. nt

[stevenleser]

130. I think that is the part that amazes me the most about these allegations

if true, where the !@#$ are the prices of these items coming from? If the labor is that cheap, and the shipping from Haiti to the US cannot be very expensive, why arent these products costing like $1.50 for underwear and $5 for jeans?

[Liberal_in_LA]

133. ugh

[lonestarnot]

150. Doesn't Walfart sell Hanes and Levi's?

[treestar]

153. The cost of living there is different

Does the President there have dictatorial powers? It appears he can set minimum wage by himself.

[Distant Observer]

158. And where did you get that BS? Been there. Seem more expensive than US for most things

[EFerrari]

165. The United States frequently helps their business partners interfere

with wages in Latin America and the Caribbean. It's not a problem with Haiti but a problem with our hemispheric policy of long standing.

[stevenleser]

172. as do all countries. furthering business interests is one of the prime missions

Of any embassy or consulate. If you don't believe me, call an embassy or consulate of any country on separate occasions and see which garners more interest, a question of length of stay limitations or an inquiry for help in investing $10 million in a new business venture in that country.

[EFerrari]

176. Well, no, all countries do not have the scope of influence that the US does.

[stevenleser]

177. That was not what I said. I said this is typical conduct of embassies. And I am right. n/t

[EFerrari]

179. Then you aren't speaking to the issue.

All countries do not sponsor assassinations and coups or subvert elections in this hemisphere. That's what we do -- when our economic program is bucked.

[stevenleser]

181. I am speaking to the exact issue you raised upthread. Now you are moving the goalposts. n/t

[TomClash]

162. An economic hit

John Perkins says hello. :hi:

[Major Hogwash]

175. Wearing levis aren't worth it anymore. I won't advertize that I wear clothes made by slave labor

I might have to go back to cheap ass JC Penny's jeans, but if that's what it takes, so be it.
I never bought designer clothes, so I don't give a shit about labels.