Bush Administration Criticizes Tiffany (Jewelers)

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/politics/8277766.htm

SPOKANE, Wash. - The jeweler Tiffany & Co. is publicly opposing plans for a silver and copper mine beneath a wilderness area in Montana, prompting a forceful response Thursday from the Bush administration.

Tiffany officials paid for an open letter published Wednesday in The Washington Post that asked Forest Service chief Dale Bosworth, whose agency has approved the mine, to block construction. The mine would require boring three miles under the Cabinet Mountains Wilderness Area near the Montana-Idaho border.

Mark Rey, an undersecretary of the Department of Agriculture, said the letter signed by Tiffany's chief executive was filled with errors, though he declined to say what they were.

<snip>

Officials with New York-based Tiffany, a 167-year-old company whose name is synonymous with fine jewelry, stood by the contents of the open letter and called for reform in federal mining policy.

...more...

can't have those old companies that believe in true conservative values having any right to "free speech" that they paid for either.

Sheesh!

that`s very interesting-that`s really old money on that board and these people are pissed? then the whitehouse mouth piece insults them? i doubt any letter from the chief exec of tiffany would have an error, do you?

own land up in Montana or Idaho. I can't see why they'd object to this from a business standpoint.

picking on poor little junior and his extraction industry benefactors like that.

These people get shitty when they don't even have to:

"I'm guessing this ad in The Washington Post cost upwards of $50,000," said Rey, director of the administration's forest policy, in a telephone interview. "For $49,999.63 less, they could have sent us this letter and given their customers a discount on their products."

They immediately get as shitty as they can with anyone that even insinuates anything about them they don't like. They immediately criticize in a really shitty and insulting way.

These jerk assholes must go.

to assure that US citizens SEE what the corrupt BushCo administration is doing?

Dear friends i love Tiffany and always have and think anything that ever came from that magical firm is magical and special, like pure glory encapsulated in a jewel.

This political statement reinforces what I regard as cutting edge of art in the 21st century. Art is political; it always has been.

Subject: Re."Bush Administration Criticizes Tiffany"

Message: Now they're hittin' close to home!!!

>Mark Rey, an undersecretary of the Department of Agriculture, said the letter signed by Tiffany's chief executive was filled with errors, though he declined to say what they were.<

I love Tiffany's. I have not been fortunate enough to own any of their jewelry as of yet, but Tiffany's has been more than wonderful to me everytime I have visited one of their stores. It may be one of the finest jewelry stores in the world, but it is possible to buy a lovely piece of crystal or one of their other gifts for a special someone for a surprisingly reasonable cost.

Wait till DH finds out that it's time to show some love at the Tiffany's. :evilgrin:

Julie

I'm glad that such a long-established firm as Tiffany's is speaking out. Consumers are starting to ask questions, and this is putting pressure on corporations. The "Kimberley Process" accord to ban the sale of "blood diamonds" is an example of this.

One thing we can do is to write letters of support to companies that are joining with activists to curtail social and environmental damage.

But, come to think of it, they don't have baubles to match her upholstered 'haute couture', anyway. *sigh*

:evilgrin:

She loves the real Diamonells Dumbya gave her.

UTNE Reader
Tuesday, April 8, 2003

Poppy Strikes Gold

April 2003
By Greg Palast,
From The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (Penguin/Plume, 2003)

In this excerpt from the recently-released U.S. edition of his book The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, renowned investigative reporter Greg Palast details the shady—and extremely lucrative—connections between former president George H. W. (“Poppy”) Bush, a little-known Canadian gold mining company, and the political fortunes of Poppy’s son Dubya. This damning story, and a second one we’ll run next week, were deleted from the British edition of Palast’s book for fear they would run afoul of that country’s draconian libel law—which makes it a crime even to print a true story if the facts could harm the reputation of a person or company.
—Ed.
...
They could well afford it. In the final days of the Bush (Senior) administration, the Interior Department made an extraordinary but little noticed change in procedures under the 1872 Mining Law, the gold rush-era act that permitted those whiskered small-time prospectors with their tin pans and mules to stake claims on their tiny plots. The department initiated an expedited procedure for mining companies that allowed Barrick to swiftly lay claim to the largest gold find in America. In the terminology of the law, Barrick could “perfect its patent” on the estimated $10 billion in ore—for which Barrick paid the U.S. Treasury a little under $ 10,000. Eureka!

Barrick, of course, had to put up cash for the initial property rights and the cost of digging out the booty (and the cost of donations, in smaller amounts, to support Nevada’s Democratic senator, Harry Reid). Still, the shift in rules paid off big time: According to experts at the Mineral Policy Center of Washington, DC, Barrick saved—and the U.S. taxpayer lost—a cool billion or so.
...
Barrick says it had no contact whatsoever with the president at the time of the rules change.<1> There was always a place in Barrick’s heart for the older Bush—and a place on its payroll. In 1995, Barrick hired the former president as Honorary Senior Advisor to the Toronto company’s International Advisory Board. Bush joined at the suggestion of former Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney, who, like Bush, had been ignominiously booted from office. I was a bit surprised that the president had signed on. When Bush was voted out of the White House, he vowed never to lobby or join a corporate board. The chairman of Barrick openly boasts that granting the title “Senior Advisor” was a sly maneuver to help Bush tiptoe around this promise.

I was curious: What does one do with a used president? Barrick vehemently denies that it appointed Bush “in order to procure him to make contact with other world leaders whom he knows, or who could be of considerable assistance” to the company. Yet, in September 1996, Bush wrote a letter to help convince Indonesian dictator Suharto to give Barrick a new, hot gold-mining concession.
...
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=207&row=4

this is just mind-blowing.

I remember back when they passed legislation to cut roads into old forests, three big companies, I believe it was Staples, Weyerhauser and somebody else said "uh .... you really don't need to do that and we really don't WANT you to do that" and the Bushco was all like "wha.....?"

These guys are destroying the planet just out of SPITE. Just because they CAN!

(taking a deep breath)

I'm about ready to pick up my pitchfork and my torch and go Frankenstien on these fuckers if you know what I'm saying.

GOD!

Who the FUCK told them they could drill a mine under a WILDERNESS AREA???? You can't even run a goddamn motor scooter, not even a fucking leaf blower, in a wilderness area! And there a good goddamn reasons for that!

Trump Building. daDonald's daughter's name is Tiffany named after the famous jewelers. Didn't daDonald said this week that 'Democrats are always better for the county.' What a coincidence.

"Mark Rey, an undersecretary of the Department of Agriculture, said the letter signed by Tiffany's chief executive was filled with errors, though he declined to say what they were."

Is this mark AHOLE rey another one of BULLshyt's crony lobbyist pals?

I have only spent a little over 1k at Tiffany & Co. but they were very professional and courteous.

Does my post contain any errors? If so just answer yes or no but don't point out what they are.