All Episodes
Previous Next
June 14, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:01
June 14, 2005, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The award-winning Thrill Pact ever exciting, increasingly popular, growing by leaps and bounds, Rush Limbaugh program on the air from the prestigious Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I am right here behind the golden EIB microphone, firmly ensconced in the prestigious Attila the Hun chair here at our Institute.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
If you'd like to be on the program today, email address, rush at EIBnet.com.
We are going to get to your phone calls.
We had a drive-by caller just a moment ago.
Drive-by caller has got an idea, but can't stay on the phone to talk about it.
He wants to know if the Club Gitmo cookbook is available.
Hell, we may as well put that together too.
The Club Gitmo cookbook and put it up on the website.
Turn this whole thing into Club Gitmo is exactly what it is.
Make it mail only to make sure that none of the vacationers from militant Islam feel put out.
I mean, you can have some women there, women to come clean the toilets out, like Barbara Boxer.
But beyond that, mail only.
You know, and if, by the way, if we have to move it, even if we have to move it, because of PR problems or whatever, let's move it to Netherland because we already got rides there.
I mean, we can add rides and everything else to the guest comfort and the fine cuisine that's offered at Club Gitmo.
I'm just going to tell you folks, if the test is that Gitmo is a public relations embarrassment and therefore has to be closed, I would argue the same thing can be said of the U.S. Senate.
It is a great embarrassment to many of us.
At least several of the senators are.
And so if we're going to close Gitmo because it's making us look bad and endangering our future, why not close down the Senate?
Because the same thing could be said of it.
All right, now I want to go back to the audio soundbites.
I got three from Michael Duffy of Time magazine.
He was on C-SPAN's Washington Journal today, and a caller said to him, what you're doing is no different than what Jane Fonda did.
And this is also great because it goes along with the theme today, the giant disconnect.
The media has one view of reality, and it's on a different planet from the rest of the people in this country.
It's just astounding to me.
And this caller captures it.
It says, what you're doing is no different to what Jane Fonda did.
You're taking sides.
Your circulations are plummeting.
The New York Times is plummeting.
The LA Times is plummeting.
The Big Three Networks ratings are plummeting.
Dan Redder just went out in a big ball to disgrace and the rest of you.
There's only one underlying question.
What is your agenda and whose side are you on?
He hasn't read the story, clearly.
He's just reacting to a headline.
Because again, this is a Pentagon document.
This isn't a will-of-the-risk rumor about something that happened.
This isn't based on what someone might think might sort of kind of maybe be in a story or a report.
This is a log put together by the Pentagon.
And the story makes clear that in exchange for what happened at Gitmo, they got another group of intelligence, you know, they had an intelligence take.
So and the whole sort of criticism of the media that you have to either be with us or against us, I always find, you know.
Let's go back and review what we're here for.
You know, the goal is to present both sides of an issue.
And so I don't actually find that to be a hard question at all.
And I think most journalists don't, because they don't really believe that they're either with them or against them.
Yeah, he's admitting here that they don't choose sides.
They're Americans, but their journalism prevents them from choosing sides.
And in fact, the goal is to present both sides of an issue.
Well, that'd be all fine and dandy if you did it.
But we don't get the stories about the great food at Gitmo.
It takes a U.S. congressman to pull that out of the hat.
We don't get all the stories about the great treatment these prisoners are getting.
We don't get the great stories about the great work the military is doing.
In fact, when the White House suggests that maybe there might be some stories that Newsweek could do to reduce some of the damage they did with their earlier erroneous report, there was a chorus of opposition in the mainstream press room of the White House saying, What?
You want us to write good stories about the military?
As though, who do you think we are?
You want us to write good stories, favorable stories?
Why not?
Why not?
So here we have this continued pretense that objectivity is present, that both sides are being represented, and we know clearly that both sides are not.
We know clearly that there is a template that Mr. Duffy and the rest of his caliber crew work on, and that is the U.S. is guilty.
The U.S. is wrong.
The U.S. is doing something it shouldn't be doing.
This war is ignoble.
The way we're treating prisoners is unjust.
And it all comes from their experiences and legacy from the Vietnam War.
Next question.
Caller says, I was wondering, I'm really not sure why we don't send detainees back to Afghanistan, put the prison right on top of a big poppy field, give everybody around there the job that they need.
I'm not understanding why we're not doing that.
We'll give them jobs as cooks, just all type of occupations.
As horrible as it would be to have done what he did, was prepared to do.
He's a weirdly innocent guy.
He doesn't.
He asks, for example, his captors whether the planets revolve around the sun.
He wants to know about dinosaurs and how they died and what they were.
He clearly has no knowledge of where Cuba is.
He thinks it might be in Florida.
He isn't exactly sure where Florida is either.
He has very, almost no understanding of the United States or the U.S. government or the Constitution or the Bible or Christianity.
He's childlike in his ignorant and in an oddly 18th century way, you know.
So that emerges that the hijackers, 19 of whom have died and will never really get to know, were children.
Children who had been convinced that this was a good way to spend their time.
And he comes off that way.
Yeah.
He's a weirdly innocent guy.
Does it trouble Mr. Duffy or anyone else that he doesn't know whether the planets revolve around the sun?
That he doesn't know about dinosaurs.
He has no knowledge of where Cuba is.
He's not sure where Florida is.
He has almost no understanding of the U.S. or U.S. government or the Constitution of the Bible or Christianity.
This is an excuse.
Mr. Duffy offers this up as an excuse of this man's quote-unquote childlike innocence.
He's weirdly innocent.
No, he is the product of hate.
He has been raised to literally hate the United States and the West, and that's all he knows about.
Now we've got to have sympathy for this poor guy because he just look at what he doesn't know.
You I keep saying the word disconnect, but does anybody disagree here?
For crying out loud, we're talking about the 20th hijacker.
And we have the press discovering a weird innocence about this man.
He's childlike.
He just is so ignorant of basic things.
How can we dare punish him?
How can we treat him this way?
Why, the hijackers, you know, that we'll never really get to know.
Those 19, we'll never really get to know those guys.
It's so sad.
We're never going to get to know those guys.
They were children.
Children, you know, who had been convinced that this was a good way to spend their time.
I want to puke.
I just.
I just don't understand these guys.
Well, I do understand it.
It's just amazing.
It's just the children, Russ.
Don't you understand?
It's just so weirdly innocent.
And we're torturing this man.
He doesn't know anything.
And then another caller.
All the liberal media is jumping in these guys who are trying to destroy our country.
We feel sorrow for these people.
I don't understand it.
I don't feel sorry for them.
It's the implication here that we somehow feel sorry for them.
I don't know where that comes from.
Again, they should read the story.
They're listening to you talk for crying out loud, Duffy.
We just played three soundbites and the people on C-SPAN heard you say this stuff this morning.
And you don't understand why people would conclude that you feel sorry for them.
Why didn't you tell us what's in the story?
Read the story.
This arrogance and condescension is another thing that's driving a huge wedge between average Americans and the mainstream press in this country.
And it is causing falling circulation, lack of trust, reduction in viewers, and a number of things like this.
I don't feel sorry for him.
It's the implication here that we somehow feel sorry.
Sorry for him.
I don't know where that comes from.
Listen to what you just said.
Childlike innocence.
Why we'll never get to know these guys.
He didn't even know where Florida is.
He doesn't even know about the Bible or Christianity.
He's this weirdly innocent guy.
So he gets a call.
Why do you feel sorry for these?
I don't feel sorry for him.
What are you talking about?
Read this story.
It's exactly what I told Howard Kurtz for his Washington Post story today.
I said these people would be wise to heed the warnings of Kathleen Holger Jameson and seriously attempt to understand how they appear to their viewers and readers.
Because I don't think they have the slightest idea.
I don't think mainstream journalists anymore have the slightest idea how they come off, how they appear to average, ordinary Americans.
Charles Wrangell, late yesterday in front of the White House, said this about the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo.
As a former combat soldier in Korea, I just want you to know that there's no question in my mind that every American that's fighting is worried to death how they're going to be treated because of the way the enemy believes that we're treating their prisoners.
Well, let's find out about that.
We have a caller who's been waiting for a while from Redding, California.
Robert, you are former Marine.
Is Representative Wrangell right here?
Are your buddies over there worried to death for themselves and their own safety because of what we're doing or supposedly doing at Gitmo?
No, my buddies know they're going to be all right because they stick together and we did all right over there, Rush.
But what upsets me is the fact that these guys want an apology.
The clerics over there, they want an apology for what's going on at Gitmo for the small select few.
Okay, I'll apologize for those small select few, but where's their apology for their small select few, okay?
What about hanging dead civilians from bridges over there?
How many years have they been burning flags?
Things like that.
The things that I hold dear, where's their apology for those things for their small select few, you know?
What about the apology for 9-11?
We haven't even heard that.
No, it's, oh, it happened.
Big deal.
You know, it's all excuses.
It's absolutely ridiculous.
Oh, it's not just that we deserved it and we convened meetings at the State Department.
Why do they hate us, though?
I couldn't tell you, Rush.
It's ridiculous.
These guys, you go over there and the way the media has portrayed the whole thing.
I went two weeks without eating an MRE a day.
That's all we had, one MRE a day.
We were going about 20 to 22 hours each day, two hours of sleep, if that.
And we had bags full of humanitarian rations that we were giving these people.
They appreciated what we were doing for them.
There's a small select few over there that's trying to kill the majority of us.
And then the clerics over there, they can't even stand to say anything positive about what the United States are doing.
They're going to get bombed.
They're afraid of their families are going to get kidnapped if they start supporting it whatsoever.
It's absolutely ridiculous.
We need to take out all of the extremists with those views because it's not fitting with the world how it is today.
In order for us to be safe, that's what's going to have to ultimately accomplish.
I'll tell you what, if one of these interrogators or guards down at Gitmo gave one of these guys an MRE, stuff that you ate every day in Iraq, you'd be fired.
Oh, my gosh.
Amnesty International will be in there claiming inhumane treatment.
You know damn well it'll be the case.
If that, we appreciate it.
There was Iraqis that would give us chickens, cooked chickens and flatbread, things like that.
We love that.
That was like a delicacy to us.
You know what Marines talk about?
The number one thing they talk about when they're overseas, away from home, family, things like that?
Food.
Can't wait to get back home to this place or that place.
Then it's family.
And then it's the other thing that everybody thinks it's going to be.
You know, the guys over there, I went over there.
I did what I was supposed to do.
When were you there, Robert?
By the way, when were you there?
I was there from February of 2003 to August.
So we weren't there that long at all.
We were there for the initial push, and then we were back.
We were an occupying force.
And I'll admit it was done wrong.
We were bypassed and weapon kept because that's what we were told.
You know, it's go out.
We were after the larger organizations.
I was with the 2nd LAR Battalion, a light armored reconnaissance force that we were out looking for the big divisions and things like that.
And all these, there's so many weapons over there still for these small few we need.
And the military is doing the best job they can over there.
I commend every soldier, Marine, airman, sailor for everything that they're doing.
As do we.
I'm sorry, go ahead.
You were saying.
Go back and look at some of the statistics from World War II and the 72 beach invasions that happened in the Pacific campaign and how many Marines died in the initial just five minutes.
And it would astound people how many people were killed as opposed to how many people are losing their lives over there.
I have been trying to make that point.
I made it yesterday.
7,000 people dead in one month or less than a month at Iwo Jima.
7,000 Marines at Iwo Jima died.
We're up to 1,700 in Iraq after a year and a half.
That was my point yesterday, Robert.
We're fighting this war through the template of Vietnam, not the template of World War II.
And I don't understand it.
We have these liberals out there who talk about how great the World War II generation was.
They wrote a book, Brokaw did.
The greatest generation.
Well, why don't we try to learn from what the, if we're going to call them the greatest generation, have all this respect for them, then why don't we try to take some education from their experience?
Why do we want to go to the Vietnam template and use that?
Well, we know the answer to that because that beats up the country.
That beats up America.
America was not victorious then.
America should not be victorious now because we don't deserve to be doing this.
We don't deserve to win.
Blah, My point is these liberals out there talk about how great the greatest generation don't believe it.
They don't believe it.
And you know how I don't believe it?
Because none of their actions indicate they believe it.
Well, they're out there articulating the words, but in terms of emulating things that generation did to save the country, you couldn't get them to even consider them today.
Quick timeout, back after this.
Stay with us.
We're back.
America's anchorman and play-by-playman of the news, Rushlin Bus, serving humanity on the EIB network.
So Charles Wrangel, Charles Wrangel says that, you know, he knows as a former combat veteran in Korea, he knows that every American soldier is worried to death over what's going to happen to them because of the way we're supposedly treating prisoners here.
Let me tell you something, Congressman Wrangel.
The enemy will mistreat our soldiers regardless of how we treat the enemy.
And we treat them damned well, and you know it.
You don't even understand the enemy after 9-11.
And that's what galls everybody.
The left in this country doesn't even understand the enemy, not even after 9-11.
How did those 3,000 innocent people on 9-11 mistreat anybody, Congressman Wrangel?
What did they do to anybody?
You can't appease these people.
You couldn't appease the Soviets.
Can't appease these kinds of people and that's really what Wrangel and these other clowns are arguing for is appeasement.
Withdraw from Iraq, close Gitmo and the rest of it, withdraw from Vietnam, withdraw everywhere.
Let's appease them, let's show them that we don't intend them any harm.
Uh, from the Gallup poll.
This was published last friday but I wasn't here, didn't get a chance to talk about it.
Public trust in newspapers and television news continued to decline in Gallup's annual survey of public confidence in major institutions in the?
U.s.
Reaching an all-time low.
This year, those having a great deal, or quite a lot, of confidence in newspapers dipped from 30 to 28 percent in one year.
Same total for television.
The previous low for newspapers was 29 percent in 1994.
Since 2000, confidence in newspapers has declined from 37 to 28 percent and in television 36 to 28 percent, according to the poll.
Rest my case.
And they are still not reacting to that news.
This is a Gallup poll and of course these people live and die by polls and when they get a poll that says what they want it to say, as in an editorial, they put it on the front pages and then they demand everybody react to the poll.
The president should react to the poll.
React, make you know, alter your policy to fit the poll.
Mr president, American people don't want your social security.
American people don't want the war in Iraq.
Look at our poll.
Well, hey media, look at your own poll.
Why don't you start reacting to the own polling data it shows up about you?
Oh no, can't do that because the people are too dense and too stupid.
They just don't understand what we do.
They don't understand.
Just read the story.
Just read the story.
That's all people have to do right, mr Duffy, and we are back.
Ladies and gentlemen, thought about this quite a bit uh, in recent days, and today I would like to join the chorus of those calling for a ceasefire in Iraq.
I don't mean a truce and I don't mean a surrender.
Don't misunderstand me.
I'm talking about a ceasefire.
I, your host El Rushbo, on today tuesday, june the 14th, call for a 90-day ceasefire in Iraq.
I call on the NEW YORK Times to lay down their arms.
I call on the Democrats in Congress to stop the assaults.
I call on weak-kneed Republicans to lower the temperature.
For 90 days, three measly months.
Lebanon is in the middle of a crucial election sequence.
Iran is about to have an even more crucial election.
Syrian and Saudi terror backers are looking for signs.
So, for 90 days, no attacks on our war effort.
Somewhere deep inside, there has to be something, a memory of patriotism, a stirring of some national pride, some remaining sense of right and wrong, a loose wire in the brains of the left and the media that can be connected, if only temporarily, to bring about a 90-day ceasefire, because the upside for the United States is enormous.
Positive news, upbeat spirit, a seemingly united United States would send a warning to our enemies, a rallying cry to our allies, and a signal to those nations shirking responsibility.
Just a 90-day ceasefire.
There's no downside to this.
You still have a full year plus to return to playing politics, to bashing the president, to bashing the administration, bashing the Republican Party, to even bashing America, if you want.
So much to gain and so little to risk from a 90-day ceasefire.
After all, it could take two years or two decades for the wisdom of our Middle East policy to bear fruit.
Is it too much to ask you on the left to give unity a chance for just 90 days?
No, my friends, I'm not living in a dream world.
I know it won't happen, but I wanted to put it out there.
I know it won't happen because the left in this country considers Christians to be a greater enemy than militant Islamist terrorists.
Here's Robert in Los Angeles.
Glad you called, sir.
You're next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hello.
Thank you, Rush.
I enjoy listening to the stories from the Marines and our soldiers from Iraq and those who've been there.
They've been great.
But it seems the only person from the administration that's talking about the war anymore is our Vice President Cheney.
If President Bush was out there every day hammering home the fact that we are still at war, you know, the media wouldn't have a chance to get into git mode.
They wouldn't have a chance to land-based our soldiers and the president on his policy.
It's up to President Bush.
He's the one who's dropped the ball on this.
Well, I understand what you're saying.
Cheney is doing a good job.
Rumsfeld's holding a press conference even now dealing with more fallout from Gitmo.
The questions here are just, for example, does it make any sense to hold these people any longer?
Since they can all have lawyers now and access our court system, why not just bring them to Leavenworth or why not bring him to a U.S. prison?
There's a reason you don't take them to the United States.
Gitmo is leased territory.
It's in Cuba, leased in perpetuity, but it's not technically U.S. territory.
These people are not subject.
This is still under appeal.
They're not subject to laws of the U.S. Constitution.
They're prisoners of war, despite what a couple of left-wing judges have attempted here.
But as far as the media is concerned, Robert, I mean, I agree, you know, Bush could use the bully pulpit more, but it's not going to stop the media.
Media is still going to do what they're going to do.
It's the same thing with Wrangell.
You know, we can let all these guys go and we could give them gift certificates for $10,000,000 or whatever, to send them away as though they've just won the lottery.
And it's not going to change the way our soldiers are treated.
That's what's so frustrating about this, so maddening, is that they just continue to seek appeasement.
They have no earthly understanding, it seems, of the nature of the enemy we face.
Jeff and Raleigh, you're next.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the EIB.
It's an honor and a privilege to speak to you, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
Yeah, I just want to let you know the last time I was embarrassed as an American was when President Clinton, when Clinton was our president, and he was in the Oval Office misusing cigars and trying to figure out what the definition of is is.
That's an excellent point.
People want to talk about how embarrassed that we are and we should be over what's happening at Gitmo.
You have nailed it.
If there was ever a time for national embarrassment, it was the Clinton years.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
And Reed, if Reed wants to be embarrassed, have at it.
Let him be embarrassed.
But he doesn't represent me as an American.
I'm proud.
I'm proud of what our guys are doing.
I'm proud of our president.
So.
Jeff, I appreciate it.
Thank you so much.
A little news story here.
This is from the Daily Mirror, or I'm sorry, it's the Sun in the UK.
I don't know if you've seen this anywhere else.
Russian President Vladimir Putin sparked uproar yesterday by saying Africans had a history of cannibalism.
He lashed out at the continent's past after being challenged about his human rights record.
In an astonishing outburst, Mr. Putin said, we all know that African countries used to have a tradition of eating their own adversaries.
We don't have such a tradition or process or culture.
And I believe the comparison between Africa and Russia is not quite just.
Tony Blair, who just finished talks with Mr. Putin, was left squirming with embarrassment as the former KGB boss let rip.
Minutes after the outburst, Mr. Blair had hailed reaching a deal with the Russian leader on aid and debt relief for Africa.
But you know what that deal is, by the way?
We are going to forgive $40 billion of debt principal.
We're going to forgive the entire print.
This is really stingy stuff, isn't it?
Why, we are really stingy people, are we not?
We're really stingy, folks.
You know, all these leftists out there saying we don't give enough per capita, we don't contribute enough, we're not doing enough to help the rest of the world.
Yeah, really stingy.
Haven't heard any criticism of Mr. Putin.
Where's Jesse Jackson?
Where are all the calls for this as being blatant racism?
Flowertown, Pennsylvania.
Greg, welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Historical dittos, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
I believe that history is on your side for Camp Gitmo.
At the outset of the Second World War, the Dutch government captured the German freighter Antila.
The crew was transferred to the tropical paradise of Bonaire.
And after the war, the prisoners enjoyed it so much, they bought the prison.
I think it's an opportunity for us for a new type of timeshare.
Are you kidding?
The prisoners bought Bonaire, the prisoners that were there, and they turned it into a resort?
Apparently, the prisoners bought at least the prison and some of Bonaire, and now it's one of the most exclusive areas for diving.
Well, incredible.
It's a bit of history that I didn't know.
That does change the perspective on Gitmo.
I think at this stage, we're probably ready to give Gitmo away rather than sell it.
I mean, selling it would be taking advantage of them because everybody knows they don't have much money.
Well, let's just give them Gitmo.
Of course, they couldn't run it as well as we do.
If they were given Gitmo, they wouldn't be able to treat themselves as well as we're treating them.
That's the dirty little secret.
As people don't know how to treat themselves as well as they get treated by us.
They're getting better treatment at Gitmo than they have in their own home countries.
And we've got American leftists whining and moaning about it.
It's just mind-boggling.
Kim in San Diego, welcome to the program.
Nice to have you.
Mega 14-year Dittos Rush.
Thank you.
I just wanted to make a point about this Gitmo menu and our kids.
Why aren't the liberals up in arms about this?
Our kids are supposedly going to school hungry while the people who are trying to kill our kids are eating like kings.
Yes, in fact, we just had a story from San Francisco last week that the kids out there didn't, school was too early for them to get breakfast.
So they're going to be given breakfast and taken to the first hour class where they get 10 minutes of their first hour class to eat breakfast because they don't have enough.
And of course, they're outlawing soda pop and a number of other things.
If you look at what the school lunch program feeds people compared to the menu at Gitmo, I'd say Kim has a point.
We're feeding militant Islamist terrorists better than our own kids in the school lunch program, which, of course, the Republicans wanted to cut back in 1995.
I say that sarcastically.
Kim, I'm glad you called.
Thanks for an excellent point.
I got to kick a quick break.
We'll do that.
Be back after this and march on.
Don't go away, folks.
And a little story here from the Investors Business Daily.
It is a new poll that has not been reported anywhere else.
Americans may not see eye to eye with President Bush on all issues, but a majority believe the U.S. military action in Iraq will lead to a more democratic and, by extension, freer Middle East.
This is according to the latest IBD TIP poll.
This poll conducted June 6th through the 10th, 913 adults.
The poll found nearly two of every three, 60%, think that America's foray into Iraq has helped sow the seeds of democracy in the Middle East.
Among Republicans, that number jumps up to 87%.
Even large numbers of Democrats, 44%, and Independents, 53%, agree with the sentiment.
The president of TIP said most Americans see a Democratic Middle East as one positive outcome of the Iraq war.
What's more, a large majority, 70%, also believe that it's important for the U.S. and coalition countries to maintain a military presence in Iraq.
The poll asked Americans about some of the roles the U.S. should take on in Iraq.
The results show the generosity of the average citizen.
84% believe that it is important for the U.S. and coalition countries to continue to train Iraqi security and police forces.
79% think it's important to provide Iraq with economic aid.
74% think it's important to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure.
Moreover, even though high-profile targets like bin Laden and al-Zarqawi are still on the loose, the global terror complex has sustained serious damage, and most Americans agree.
According to the poll, 57% agree that the Iraq war has dealt a significant blow to terrorist networks worldwide.
More than twice as many Republicans see things this way than Democrats, 87% to 39%.
Now, although much good has come out of the Iraq war, the media have repeatedly viewed it as a half-empty glass.
Perhaps that's why, when asked if U.S. efforts in Iraq are helping to make the world a safer place or not, 46% said yes, 49% said no.
Nearly half, 49% are satisfied with the Bush administration's Iraq policies, and 42 are not satisfied.
Now, this poll is from Investors Business Daily.
I doubt that you'll see reference to it anywhere else.
It's the exact opposite data that you get from all of the other network polls like ABC, Washington Post, CBS, New York Times.
I'm just telling you, those news, folks, look, it's time to call a spade a spade.
When those companies and those outfits come out with a poll, consider it an editorial of those news divisions.
So when the ABC Washington Post poll comes out, look at it as an editorial.
And they present it as news.
They take the poll, ask questions in a certain way to get the answer they want, then broadcast it as though it's major news.
And you can find contradictory polling data on practically every mainstream media poll that's out there.
It's just amazing.
If you heard about this, a memo written by someone who was then an executive of a major contractor at the United Nations Oil for Food program states that he briefly discussed the company's effort to win the contract in late 1998 with Secretary General Kofi Annan and his entourage, and that the executive was told we could count on their support.
The Secretary General's son, Kojo Annan, who has since been thrown overboard by his father, Kofi, was employed by Kotechna Inspection Services, a Swiss contractor based in Geneva.
The nature of that relationship is among the issues being investigated by a panel appointed by the U.N. and several congressional committees.
Kofi Annan has said several times he never discussed the contract with his son and was not involved in Kotechna's selection.
A UN panel headed by Paul Volcker concluded in March that Kofi had not influenced the awarding of the $10 million a year contract for the company.
But the memo appears to raise questions about the Secretary General's role.
No senior Kotetchna officials initially had any memory of the email or of such a meeting with Kofi being there.
The memo appears to contradict what the company has said, said the company's consultant, who declined to be identified.
Copies of the memo were provided to the New York Times, and the consultant confirmed that it was authentic.
Well, I guess we have to go with that since the consultant for the company said it's authentic.
And Dan Rather and CBS are nowhere near the story, so we can assume that the memo is authentic.
Now, the memo does not state that Kojo was present at the discussion with the Secretary General, but it continues with a description of courtesy meetings on behalf of Kotechna with the presidents of several African countries held by a person identified as KA.
That would be Kofi Annan.
So Kofi was at the meeting.
He knew what was going on and told the company that he could be counted on.
And he's denied all of this.
But this memo seems to link Kofi to the contract with his son's company.
So that plot thickens out there.
The plot just seems to thicken.
And by the way, do any of us doubt that there's corruption in high places in the UN?
Oil for food program?
How could Kofi not know about it?
I mean, the idea that he didn't know anything about it and had no direct involvement, that's what's hard to believe.
So, you know, Kojo's still out there swimming because he's been thrown overboard.
Kofi is high and dry.
But it seems that some of Kojo's water being splashed around and he's swimming out there starting to get on Kofi a bit.
No, I will not resign.
No, I will not resign.
No, I had nothing to do with it.
My son is a reprobate.
No, I will not resign.
My son is a gold-digging, ungrateful little rat.
No, I will not resign.
Kofi Annan has made it clear where he stands on this.
Really close family ties there, don't you think?
Back after this, they were.
A helicopter with seven people aboard has crashed near Wall Street in New York, and the pontoons on the bottom of the helicopter have inflated, and the helicopter in the water upside down, seven people aboard.
I don't know about the fate of the seven people aboard, but the Coast Guard's all over the place.
They've now dragged the helicopter to the bank to shore, and they're trying to right it.
But again, I don't have any details on the fate of the people inside.
Cable networks are showing pictures of the rescue effort.
Oh, all seven people have been rescued.
All right, there we have.
All seven people were rescued.
And so now it's just a matter of trying to get the helicopter out of the water.
They apparently had what is called a hard landing.
And the pontoons inflated automatically to keep it afloat.
Well, I'm thinking, you know, circumstances are pretty dangerous in Wall Street given this helicopter crash.
And we might want to consider withdrawing, pulling out of Wall Street, ladies.
It just may be too dangerous to go there, work there, however you get there.
Something we might want to consider.
And short of that, we could just ban helicopters.
And then after yesterday in Fort Lauderdale banned DC-3s, because one of those crashed on takeoff.
The crew survived, apparently in both cases.
▲
Export Selection