tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-78472712024-03-14T02:07:37.950-03:00Republicans AnonymousAn on-line magazine running articles urging Republicans to change their self-destructive voting habits.
<br />
<br />Helping Reality Fight "W and his Bush League minions"RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.comBlogger450125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-39516099263626335742007-01-27T19:42:00.000-03:002007-01-27T19:47:17.113-03:00Return from Oblivion<div style="width:426; background-color:rgb(216,233,237); text-align:center;"><br /> <div style="background:rgb(129,172,201); height:4px;"><br /> <img src="http://www.quizilla.com/images/blue_drk_corner1.gif" style="float: left" height="4" hspace="0" /><br /> <img src="http://www.quizilla.com/images/blue_drk_corner2.gif" style="float: right" height="4" hspace="0" /><br /> </div><br /> <div style="background:rgb(129,172,201); padding: 0pt 0pt 5px;"><br /> <span style="font-size:12px; color:rgb(255,255,255); padding:3px; font-family:Arial;"><strong>What mythical beast are you?</strong></span><br /> </div><br /> <div style="padding:5px; text-align:left; font-size:12px; font-family:Arial; background-color:rgb(216,233,237);"><br /><br /><center><img src="http://images.quizilla.com/L/laur/1038579034_ktopDragon.jpg"><br/>You're a dragon. You're smart and cunning, and enjoy taking risks. Your need for independence is an advantage, but sometimes it alienates you from others. As far as *good* and *evil*, you're pretty neutral--but you may have something of a wicked streak.<br/>Take this <a target="quizilla" style="color:rgb(0,0,0)" href="http://quizilla.com/redirect.php?statsid=17&url=http://www.quizilla.com/users/laur/quizzes/What+mythical+beast+are+you%3F">quiz</a>!<br/></center><br /><br /><br/><a href="http://www.quizilla.com/redirect.php?statsid=18&url=http://www.quizilla.com/" target="quizilla"><br /><img border="0" src="http://www.quizilla.com/images/codepastes/30qzlogo.gif" style="padding:2px;" /></a><br /><br /><span style="font-family:Arial;font-size:12;"><br /><br /><a style="color:rgb(0,0,0);" target="quizilla" href="http://www.quizilla.com/redirect.php?statsid=18&url=http://www.quizilla.com">Quizilla</a> | <br /><a style="color:rgb(0,0,0);" target="quizilla" href="http://www.quizilla.com/redirect.php?statsid=21&url=http://www.quizilla.com/register">Join</a> <br /><br />| <a style="color:rgb(0,0,0);" target="quizilla" href="http://www.quizilla.com/redirect.php?statsid=20&url=http://www.quizilla.com/makeaquiz.php">Make A Quiz</a> | <a target="quizilla" href="http://www.quizilla.com/redirect.php?statsid=42&url=http://www.quizilla.com/users/laur/quizzes/">More Quizzes</a> | <a style="color:rgb(0,0,0);" target="quizilla" href="http://www.quizilla.com/redirect.php?statsid=19&url=http://www.quizilla.com/codepastes/?quizid=16565">Grab Code</a></span><br /></div></div>RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1143387647329633522006-03-26T12:25:00.000-03:002006-03-26T12:41:50.086-03:00Spinning PropagandaThe Washington Post has this amusing article about the Lincoln Group's distaste for the "P" word: <blockquote><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/25/AR2006032500983.html">The Word at War</a><br /><i>Propaganda? Nah, Here's the Scoop, Say the Guys Who Planted Stories in Iraqi Papers</i><br />By Lynne Duke<br />Washington Post Staff Writer<br />Sunday, March 26, 2006; D01<br /><br />Oh, no, not at all -- the Lincoln Group does not do propaganda. Sure, the firm's been tarred by some in Congress, the media and the defense establishment for paying Iraqi newspapers to publish hundreds of "news" stories secretly written by U.S. troops.<br /><br />But Paige Craig, the West Point dropout and former Marine intelligence specialist who is the Lincoln Group's president, says the practice is not propaganda. The word carries such baggage, such suggestions of mind control. So in an industry in which euphemism thrives, a more elegant word is deployed.<br /><br />"We call it 'influence,' " says Craig, whose business has 12 U.S. government contracts totaling more than $130 million.</blockquote>That's epitomizes the Bush League's entire philosophy - they really think words <i>create</i> reality rather than <i>describing</i> it. To paraphrase Shakespeare: Waterboarding by any other name would still be torture.RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1143314762884411162006-03-25T16:24:00.000-03:002006-03-25T16:26:31.846-03:00Dick Cheney's Undisclosed Location RevealedI expect Dick Cheney will be vacationing <a href="http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4844008.stm">here.</a> I mean, how could he <i>resist</i>?RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1143179418980398102006-03-24T02:41:00.000-03:002006-03-24T02:50:18.993-03:00Bush's Influence on the MilitaryI cannot believe this level of pure hypocrisy is being reported without more comment: <blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/24/international/middleeast/24detain.html?ex=1300856400&en=159d5e6041c28f3c&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">Challenge for U.S.: Iraq's Handling of Detainees</a><br />New York Times<br />By EDWARD WONG<br />CAMP JUSTICE, Iraq — The blindfolded detainees in the dingy hallway line up in groups of five for their turn to see a judge, like schoolchildren outside the principal's office.<br /><br />Each meeting lasts a few minutes. The judge rules whether the detainee will go free, face trial or be held longer at this Iraqi base in northern Baghdad. But Firas Sabri Ali, squeezed into a fetid cell just hundreds of yards from the judge's office, has watched the inmates come and go for four months without his name ever being called.<br />...<br />Such is the challenge facing the American military as it tries to train the Iraqi security forces to respect the rule of law. Three years after the invasion of Iraq, American troops are no longer simply teaching counterinsurgency techniques; they are trying to school the Iraqis in battling a Sunni-led rebellion without resorting to the tactics of a "dirty war," involving abductions, torture and murder.<br /><br /><b><i>The legacy of Abu Ghraib hampers the American military.</i></b> The legacy of Abu Ghraib hampers the American military. But the need to instill respect for human rights has gained a new urgency as Iraq grapples with the threat of full-scale civil war and continuing sectarian bloodletting. It is not uncommon now for dozens of bodies, with hands bound and gunshot wounds to the heads, to surface across Baghdad on any given day.<br /><br />The Americans are pushing the Shiite-dominated Iraqi forces to ask judges for arrest warrants, restrain their use of force and ensure detainees' rights. <br />(Emphasis added.)</blockquote>Interestingly, W and his Bush League minions think asking US Judges for warrants is impractical in a post 9/11 world. The Bush League wants to lock up "enemy combatants" forever with no judicial review.RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142802800874671492006-03-19T18:04:00.000-03:002006-03-19T18:14:16.350-03:00Recent Surge of ViolenceThe phrase "<a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=574939&mesg_id=574939">recent surge of violence</a>" has replaced "turning the corner" as the lead chiché in Iraq War reporting. EarlG of DemocraticUnderground.com notes this phrase has been used since 2003: <blockquote>This morning I learned that Pentagon officials have said that force levels in Iraq would not be cut "anytime soon," apparently because of a "recent surge in violence" sweeping Iraq. But what struck me most about that news was votesomemore's response in this thread claiming that, "There is ALWAYS a 'recent surge in violence.'"<br /><br />That got me thinking. Is there always a "recent surge in violence" in Iraq? I Googled the phrase, and discovered that the answer to the question is, well, yes.<br />(Source: <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com">Democratic Underground</a> post "<a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=574939&mesg_id=574939">Recent Surge of Violence</a>, March 4, 2006)</blockquote>Thesaurus, anyone?RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142716228181921402006-03-18T17:53:00.000-03:002006-03-18T18:12:56.633-03:00Another Bush League Torture ScandalMore horror stories of Bush League incompetence and disregard for the law, human rights, or anything else: <blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/19/international/middleeast/19abuse.html?ex=1300424400&en=e8775a43031464a1&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">Before and After Abu Ghraib, a U.S. Unit Abused Detainees</a><br />By ERIC SCHMITT and CAROLYN MARSHALL<br />As the Iraqi insurgency intensified in early 2004, an elite Special Operations forces unit converted one of Saddam Hussein's former military bases near Baghdad into a top-secret detention center. There, American soldiers made one of the former Iraqi government's torture chambers into their own interrogation cell. They named it the Black Room.<br />...<br />Placards posted by soldiers at the detention area advised, "NO BLOOD, NO FOUL." The slogan, as one Defense Department official explained, reflected an adage adopted by Task Force 6-26: "If you don't make them bleed, they can't prosecute for it." According to Pentagon specialists who worked with the unit, prisoners at Camp Nama often disappeared into a detention black hole, barred from access to lawyers or relatives, and confined for weeks without charges. <b><i>"The reality is, there were no rules there," another Pentagon official said.</i></b><br /><br />The story of detainee abuse in Iraq is a familiar one. But the following account of Task Force 6-26, based on documents and interviews with more than a dozen people, offers the first detailed description of how the military's most highly trained counterterrorism unit committed serious abuses.<br /><br />It adds to the picture of harsh interrogation practices at American military prisons in Afghanistan and Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as well as at secret Central Intelligence Agency detention centers around the world.<br /><br />The new account reveals the extent to which the unit members mistreated prisoners months before and after the photographs of abuse from Abu Ghraib were made public in April 2004, and <b><i>it helps belie the original Pentagon assertions that abuse was confined to a small number of rogue reservists at Abu Ghraib.</i></b><br /><br />The abuses at Camp Nama continued despite warnings beginning in August 2003 from an Army investigator and American intelligence and law enforcement officials in Iraq. The C.I.A. was concerned enough to bar its personnel from Camp Nama that August.<br /><br />It is difficult to compare the conditions at the camp with those at Abu Ghraib because so little is known about the secret compound, which was off limits even to the Red Cross. <b><i>The abuses appeared to have been unsanctioned, but some of them seemed to have been well known throughout the camp.</i></b><br />...<br />Many were initially reluctant to discuss Task Force 6-26 because its missions are classified. But when pressed repeatedly by reporters who contacted them, they agreed to speak about their experiences and observations out of what they said was anger and disgust over the unit's treatment of detainees and the failure of task force commanders to punish misconduct more aggressively. <b><i>The critics said the harsh interrogations yielded little information to help capture insurgents or save American lives.</i></b><br />(Source: New York Times, March 18, 2006 [emphasis added.])</blockquote>Long story short: there was widespread torture of Iraqi detainees by US troops. This was at least ignored - but more probably condoned and possibly expressly ordered by the top brass. Despite the mounting evidence, none of the persons responsible for either ordering, inciting or tolerating these war crimes will be investigated unless and until the Democrats regain control of at least one branch of Congress. America's reputation and honor have been permanently stained by W and his Bush League minions, yet the Republicans don't care.RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142565265594762642006-03-16T23:59:00.001-03:002006-03-17T23:43:10.500-03:00US Launches Major Public Relations OffensiveIn an effort to reverse sliding poll number, W's Bush League minions conducted a massive military campaign calculated to make US voters think something effective was done:<blockquote><b><a href="http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4814094.stm">US launches major Iraq offensive</a></b><br />The US military says it has launched its biggest airborne operation in Iraq since the 2003 invasion, targeting insurgents near the city of Samarra.<br />More than 50 aircraft and 1,500 Iraqi and US troops have been deployed in the assault, a military statement says.<br /><br />A bomb attack on the al-Askari shrine in Samarra, 100km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, last month sparked widespread sectarian violence.<br /><br />There are no independent reports of Thursday's offensive so far.<br /><br />The US military said the assault, dubbed Operation Swarmer, was intended to "clear a suspected insurgent operating area" north-east of Samarra.<br /><br />Helicopters were used to carry mostly Iraqi troops into Salahuddin province, where the Pentagon said at least 41 suspected insurgents had been arrested by the end of the day.<br /><br />No missiles were fired or bombs dropped by the fixed-wing aircraft providing cover, the US military confirmed. It was unclear whether the suspected insurgents had offered resistance.<br />(Source: BBC News, March 16, 2006)</blockquote>So, they rounded up "at least 41" Sunnis who will probably wind up tortured and killed by Negroponte-inspired Shi'ite death squads. I'm sure the right wing chorus is shouting from the rooftops how "the corner has been turned" yet again. <br /><br />What utter bilge. Iraq's only hope for peace in the near term is for about a million troops to come in and stop the sectarian killing until the cycle of revenge damps out for awhile. Unfortunately, Iraq's misery will go on until Bush leaves office. Until then, El Busho will continue trying to "cover his bleeding ass with the flag of victory" while characterizing the death toll as "messy."RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142486424036302602006-03-16T02:03:00.000-03:002006-03-16T02:20:24.083-03:00Child Abuse Cover-UpI don't know what angers me more: the rampant child abuse hellholes marketed as "boot camps for troubled teens" or the willingness of authorities to cover up the resulting deaths: <blockquote><a href="">Pathologist: Teen Didn't Die From Illness</a><br />By MITCH STACY<br />The Associated Press<br />Wednesday, March 15, 2006; 7:07 AM<br /><br />TAMPA, Fla. -- A pathologist who observed the second autopsy of a 14-year-old boy who was punched and kicked by guards at a juvenile boot camp said Tuesday the boy may not have died of a blood disorder as a medical examiner had ruled.<br /><br />Dr. Michael Baden, who observed the new autopsy on behalf of the teen's family, said it was clear Martin Lee Anderson did not die from sickle cell trait, or from any other natural causes.<br />..<br />Anderson was sent to the Bay County Sheriff's Office boot camp on Jan. 5 for a probation violation. A surveillance video showed guards kicking and punching him after he collapsed while exercising on his first day at the camp, and he died at a hospital early the next day.<br />...<br />The second autopsy was ordered after the teen's parents questioned the findings of Bay County's medical examiner, and was conducted Monday by Hillsborough County Medical Examiner Vernard Adams.<br /><br />"My opinion is that he died because of what you see in the videotape," said Baden, referring to the surveillance video. </blockquote>Smart money says the county medical examiner knew full well this kid was beaten to death, but wanted to protect the county from a big lawsuit and ensure the officers were free to continue abusing the inmates. Call me a bleeding heart liberal, but I doubt beating an uncooperative kid senseless is an effective way of teaching him not to use violence against those he himself finds both frustrating and weaker.RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142403299204851842006-03-15T02:59:00.000-03:002006-03-15T03:15:50.076-03:00Will Appeals Court Turn Justice On Its Head?Justice at the trial court level won - but that's only Round One: <blockquote><b><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/14/AR2006031400132.html">Federal Witnesses Banned in 9/11 Trial</a></b><br />Judge Cites Misconduct By Lawyer; Prosecution Faces Major Setback<br /><i>By Jerry Markon and Timothy Dwyer<br />Washington Post Staff Writers</i><br />Wednesday, March 15, 2006; Page A01<br /><br />A judge barred key government witnesses from testifying at the death penalty trial of Sept. 11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui, ruling yesterday that the misconduct of a federal lawyer had so tainted the proceeding that all evidence concerning aviation security must be stricken.<br />...<br />U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema issued her ruling at the close of an extraordinary hearing in Alexandria that centered on the conduct of Carla J. Martin, 51, a Transportation Security Administration lawyer who improperly shared testimony and communicated with seven witnesses. New evidence emerged that Martin was heavily involved in the case and had committed what Brinkema called other "egregious errors."<br /><br /><b><i>The most serious was telling a prosecutor that witnesses sought by defense attorneys had refused to meet with them. Relying on Martin's contact with the witnesses, prosecutor David J. Novak relayed the information to the defense. After hearing from those witnesses yesterday, Brinkema called Martin's information "a baldfaced lie."</i></b><br /><br />"I cannot allow that kind of conduct to go without there being serious sanctions," Brinkema said as she struck the expected testimony and all of the evidence about aviation. "It would likely turn the criminal justice system on its head."<br />...<br />Yesterday's hearing featured only a brief appearance by the woman at the center of the controversy. Brinkema warned Martin that she could be held in criminal or civil contempt. In an unusual move, the judge read Martin a version of the Miranda warning given by police to criminal suspects as she took the stand at the start of the hearing.<br /><br />Speaking agitatedly, Martin said she "very much" wanted to testify but that it was an "adversarial proceeding" and that she needed a lawyer. With that, Martin left the courtroom and did not return. Her attorney, Roscoe C. Howard Jr., later told the judge that Martin would not be available to testify. Howard, a former U.S. attorney in the District, declined to comment.<br />(Emphasis added.)</blockquote>Now that Ms. Martin has been caught, I'm sure "the Secretary will disavow any knowledge of her actions." Had she gotten away with it, she would undoubtedly be on the fast track for promotion. As it is, maybe she can join <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-11-25-brown-disasters_x.htm">Brownie's disaster preparedness consulting firm</a> - or get a job with <a href="http://mediamatters.org/items/200603060009">Bill O'Reilly's Special Police Squad</a>.RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142346267776085852006-03-14T11:17:00.000-03:002006-03-14T11:24:27.786-03:00Ethics? We Don't Need No Stinking Ethics!Can you say "prosecutorial misconduct?" <blockquote><b><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/14/national/14moussaoui.html?ex=1299992400&en=95f8bfdedfaa6208&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">Judge Calls Halt to Penalty Phase of Terror Trial</a></b><br /><br />By NEIL A. LEWIS<br />ALEXANDRIA, Va., March 13 — An angry federal judge delayed the sentencing trial of Zacarias Moussaoui on Monday and said she was considering ending the prosecution's bid to have him executed after the disclosure that a government lawyer had improperly coached some witnesses.<br /><br />Judge Leonie M. Brinkema said she had just learned from prosecutors that a lawyer for the Transportation Security Administration gave portions of last week's trial proceedings to seven witnesses who have yet to testify. In e-mail messages, the lawyer also seemed to tell some of the witnesses how they should testify to bolster the prosecution's argument that Mr. Moussaoui bore some responsibility for the deaths caused by the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.<br /><br />"In all my years on the bench, I've never seen a more egregious violation of the rule about witnesses," Judge Brinkema said before sending the jury home for two days. She said that the actions of the government lawyer, identified in court papers as Carla J. Martin, would make it "very difficult for this case to go forward."<br />(Source: New York Times)</blockquote>Gee, you'd almost think they were more concerned with getting a death penalty verdict than with the concepts of justice and fair play. Admittedly, the Republican dictionary defines those terms as "whatever the President says; see <i>fuehrerprincip</i>", but still...RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142178071361449762006-03-12T12:09:00.000-03:002006-03-12T12:41:11.430-03:00Bush League Diplomatic Efforts Fail AgainThe Republican "make special rules for US or we won't give you any money" school of diplomacy doesn't work well in a time when the US teeters on the edge of fiscal ruin. <blockquote><b><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/12/politics/12rice.html?ex=1299819600&en=cd9ec666882a5c88&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">U.S. Rethinks Its Cutoff of Military Aid to Latin American Nations</a></b><br /><br />By STEVEN R. WEISMAN<br />SANTIAGO, Chile, March 11 — Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice indicated Saturday that the United States would look for ways to resume military assistance to Latin American nations cut off from aid programs because of their refusal to shield Americans from the International Criminal Court.<br />...<br />Eliminating or reducing military assistance to countries like Chile and Bolivia that are seeking to combat terrorism or drug trafficking is "sort of the same as shooting ourselves in the foot," Ms. Rice told reporters on Friday as she traveled here for the inauguration of Michelle Bachelet as the new president of Chile.<br /><br />Ms. Rice said, however, that the Bush administration had limited flexibility in restoring aid because <b><i>a law enacted by Congress required the cutoff of military aid to countries that did not exempt American citizens from being brought before the court.</i></b><br /><br />At least 30 countries have declined to enact an exemption, including 12 in Latin America and the Caribbean.<br /><br />At the time the law was adopted, the Defense Department supported it on grounds that American military officials based overseas might be brought before the court. More recently, administration officials said Defense Department officials had become concerned about the loss of military cooperation with key allies.<br />(Source: New York Times [emphasis added.])</blockquote>What the New York Times fails to mention is that the law forbidding military aid to countries failing to enact special rights for US citizens accused of things like human rights abuses was passed by Tom DeLay and Jesse Helms: <blockquote><a href="http://www.law.northwestern.edu/depts/clinic/ihr/display_details.cfm?ID=271&document_type=commentary">Congress and the Saddam Hussein Protection Act</a><br />by Douglass Cassel<br /><br />The same day the House of Representatives recently voted not to pay an installment of our UN dues -- despite our legal obligation and prior commitment to pay -- it also passed a bill which attempts to achieve by legislation what the US could not achieve by negotiation, namely to strong arm our allies into exempting Americans from the International Criminal Court for genocide, serious war crimes and crimes against humanity.<br /><br />Despite its politically irresistible title, the "<a href="http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rls/othr/misc/23425.htm">American Service Members' Protection Act</a>" does nothing real to protect our troops. As the American Bar Association pointed out to Congress, keeping GI's out of the International Criminal Court will merely relegate them to the less tender mercies of the courts of foreign potentates.<br /><br />The ruse of protecting GI's is, for some, a cover for other agendas. For chief House and Senate sponsors Tom DeLay and Jesse Helms, the bill is a vehicle to pursue their broader ideological objective: a foreign policy based on unilateralism rather than on cooperation with other nations. If the bill seems calculated to offend other nations and to thwart our participation in UN peacekeeping, so much the better.<br />(Source: Commentaries, Northwestern University School of Law, Center for International Human Rights</blockquote>RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1142118342535610252006-03-11T19:41:00.000-03:002006-03-11T20:05:42.593-03:00"Due Process" Rights in BizarrolandCompare and contrast: <blockquote><bigger><b><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/national/11terror.html?ex=1299733200&en=a26440f9d38bbe88&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">Judge Issues Secret Ruling in Case of 2 at Mosque</a></b></bigger><br />By JULIA PRESTON<br />New York Times, March 11, 2006<br />A federal judge issued a highly unusual classified ruling yesterday, denying a motion for dismissal of a case against two leaders of an Albany mosque who are accused of laundering money in a federal terrorism sting operation.<br /><br />Because the ruling was classified, the defense lawyers were barred from reading why the judge decided that way.</blockquote><br />On the other hand, if you're a former minion of Deadeye Dick Cheney: <blockquote><bigger><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/11/politics/11libby.html?ex=1299733200&en=3f83abb84bd99d17&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">Judge Tries Compromise on Briefs Libby Is Seeking</a></bigger><br />By NEIL A. LEWIS<br />New York Times, March 11, 2006<br />WASHINGTON, March 10 — A federal judge ruled on Friday that I. Lewis Libby Jr. was entitled to review a limited amount of information from highly classified intelligence documents in order to defend himself against charges that he lied about his role in disclosing the identity of a C.I.A. operative.<br /><br />Confronted with a legal issue that has the potential to sabotage the prosecution of Mr. Libby, the judge, Reggie B. Walton, sought a compromise to allow the case to go forward.<br />...<br />Theodore V. Wells Jr., his chief defense lawyer, argued that Mr. Libby needed the President's Daily Briefs to refresh his memory and to add substance to his argument that he was "so focused on urgent national security matters, it is hardly surprising that he would later confuse, forget or misremember" conversations with reporters about Ms. Wilson.</blockquote>To recap, Scooter Libby's defense team has the right to view documents only marginally releted to his alleged crime - but Yassin Aref's defense team <i>cannot view critical evidence against their client's alleged crimes.</i>RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1141974507440614032006-03-10T03:53:00.000-03:002006-03-10T04:08:27.453-03:00Live By Racial Profiling...W and his Bush League minions have discovered they can't both fan people's fears of Muslims in general while simultaneously claiming that rich Muslims are trustworthy. So, they're going to Bush League playbook page 2 - the public concession that later turns out to be illusory: <blockquote><a href="http://today.reuters.com/news/NewsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-03-10T024658Z_01_N09169509_RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-PORTS.xml">Dubai firm pledges to transfer US ports</a><br />Thu Mar 9, 2006 9:47 PM ET<br />WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The state-owned Arab company Dubai Ports World pledged on Thursday to transfer operation of six U.S. port terminals to a U.S. entity, a move the White House said should settle a political firestorm surrounding the deal. But the U.S. Congress was skeptical.<br /><br />Many lawmakers have demanded that the Dubai company be stopped from running the ports because of potential security risks, rebelling against President George W. Bush, whose administration approved the company's involvement in January.<br /><br />"It does provide a way forward and resolve the matter ...," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said of the company's announcement.<br /><br />The statement by Dubai Ports World's chief operating officer, Edward Bilkey, said that the company had decided to "transfer fully ... to a U.S. entity" the operation of North American ports terminals it had acquired from British-based</blockquote>It currently sounds like Congress isn't going to fall for it this time: <blockquote>"To simply say that the U.S. entity will be separate isn't enough. How will it be separate? How thick is the wall?" demanded New York Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer.<br /><br />The company announcement is not clear enough, said Florida Republican Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairwoman of the Middle East subcommittee of the House International Relations panel.<br /><br />"Is the ports deal dead? Will the U.S. entity be a mere shell company?" she asked. "Current congressional plans are to move forward with the appropriations language next week which kills the transaction. Just to make sure."<br /><br />One House Republican leadership aide said on Thursday that because of the company's announcement, there could be a motion to strike the language reversing the deal in the House next week -- but noted that this would still require a vote.<br />(Reuters)</blockquote>My prediction is that the Republican whitewashers will cave in, and the deal will proceed. The interesting thing will be whether the U.S. subsidiary is required to store its records in the U.S., where they fall within the jurisdiction of our courts. One of the big untold stories behind this deal was how the Dubai company was going to be allowed to keep its business records offshore - well hidden from those pesky trial lawyers. Hard to prove laws were knowingly violated by a Dubai government-owned company if all the records are stored in Dubai...RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1141882852705660352006-03-09T02:35:00.000-03:002006-03-09T02:40:52.716-03:00Now 1 Days Since Violating Federal LawI'm sure the Republicans in Congress will immediately start a wide-ranging investigation into how this could possibly <s>happen</s> have been reported:<blockquote><a href="http://nytimes.com/2006/03/09/politics/09terror.html?hp&ex=1141966800&en=cc9b054dd73a3b79&ei=5094&partner=homepage">Justice Dept. Report Cites F.B.I. Violations</a><br />By ERIC LICHTBLAU<br />Published: March 9, 2006<br />WASHINGTON, March 8 — The Federal Bureau of Investigation found apparent violations of its own wiretapping and other intelligence-gathering procedures more than 100 times in the last two years, and problems appear to have grown more frequent in some crucial respects, a Justice Department report released Wednesday said.<br />(Source: <i>New York Times</i>)</blockquote>RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1141828440522009272006-03-08T11:33:00.000-03:002006-03-08T11:37:17.983-03:00Tom Sawyer, Eat your Heart OutWhen it comes to talking folks into whitewashing something, nlobody does it better than W and his Bush League minions:<blockquote><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/07/AR2006030701549.html">Senate Panel Blocks Eavesdropping Probe</a><br />By Walter Pincus<br />Washington Post Staff Writer<br />Wednesday, March 8, 2006; Page A03<br /><br /><br />The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted along party lines yesterday to reject a Democratic proposal to investigate the Bush administration's domestic surveillance program and instead approved establishing, with White House approval, a seven-member panel to oversee the effort.<br /><br />Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) told reporters after the closed session that he had asked the committee "to reject confrontation in favor of accommodation" and that the new subcommittee, which he described as "an accommodation with the White House," would "conduct oversight of the terrorist surveillance program." The program, which became public in December, has allowed the National Security Agency to monitor phone calls and e-mails between U.S. residents and suspected terrorists abroad without first obtaining warrants from a secret court that handles such matters.<br /><br />The panel's vice chairman, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), took a sharply different view of yesterday's outcome. "The committee is, to put it bluntly, basically under the control of the White House through its chairman," he told reporters. "At the direction of the White House, the Republican majority has voted down my motion to have a careful and fact-based review of the National Security Agency's surveillance eavesdropping activities inside the United States."</blockquote>RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1141709324886743112006-03-07T02:20:00.000-03:002006-03-07T02:28:44.916-03:00Oscars Honor Karl RoveYes, the Best Song Award to <a href="http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=529&ncid=529&e=11&u=/ap/20060306/ap_en_mu/oscars_song_performances_11">It’s Hard Out There for a Pimp</a> was an obvious homage to Karl Rove. After all, Mr. Rove makes his living convincing people to let Bush screw them...RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1141576826995215492006-03-05T13:14:00.000-03:002006-03-05T13:40:31.626-03:00Was Pat Tillman Hunting Quail?The New York Times reports that the Defense Department is opening a <b><i>criminal</i></b> investigation into the "friendly fire" death of Cpl. Pat Tillman. Here's the bit that caught my eye: <blockquote>Col. Joseph Curtin, an Army spokesman, said that the scope of the new inquiry had yet to be defined but that investigators would look at <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">whether the soldiers violated military law when they failed to identify their targets before opening fire</span> on his position.<br />(Source: <i>New York Times</i> <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/politics/05tillman.html?hp&ex=1141621200&amp;en=2463e361b62d1cf2&ei=5094&partner=homepage">Army Ordered to Look Again at Battle Death</a>, March 5, 2006 [emphasis added.])</blockquote>Dick Cheney didn't identify <span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">his</span><span style="font-weight: bold;"> </span>target before opening fire, and he wasn't even in a combat zone. Why prosecute grunt-level soldiers for the same type of mistake made by the Vice President of the United States? Is this yet another Bush League double-standard - the "It's OK for Rich White Guys to be Careless With Guns" rule for Deadeye Dick versus the "relentlessly prosecute any enlisted personnel generating unfavorable news stories" standard for folks actually putting their lives on the line?RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1140369547745871602006-02-19T13:57:00.000-03:002006-02-19T14:19:07.826-03:00Dick Cheney: Upper Class Twit of the YearLife seems more and more like a series of bad Monty Python sketch imitations. Consider Dick Cheney's Quail "hunt" in which one drives up to a batch of pen-raised birds and starts blasting away. Isn't this just a cheap imitation of the "shoot the rabbit" event in Monty Python's <a href="http://www.jumpstation.ca/recroom/comedy/python/twit.html">Upper-Class Twit of the Year</a> sketch?<br /><br />In the Monty Python sketch, the rabbits are staked to the ground and unable to move while the twits blast away. Near as I can tell, the quail "hunt" takes pen-raised birds and releases them in front of the hunters' sights. Calling this "hunting" is like driving to one of those spots where farm-raised trout are kept in artificial ponds for children to catch and calling it "fishing." <br /><br />I'm surprised they don't clip the quails' wings and then load them on little skeet launchers for the hunters' enjoyment.RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1139895221323895662006-02-14T02:12:00.000-03:002006-02-14T02:33:41.406-03:00Billions for Big Oil, Not One Cent for Katrina Victimshttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gifW and his Bush League minions are pushing for billions more in giveaways to Big Oil: <blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/business/14oil.html?ex=1297573200&en=97dc4137a6add7c2&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">U.S. Royalty Plan to Give Windfall to Oil Companies</a><br />By EDMUND L. ANDREWS<br />WASHINGTON, Feb. 13 — The federal government is on the verge of one of the biggest giveaways of oil and gas in American history, worth an estimated $7 billion over five years.<br /><br />New projections, buried in the Interior Department's just-published budget plan, anticipate that the government will let companies pump about $65 billion worth of oil and natural gas from federal territory over the next five years without paying any royalties to the government.<br />...<br />Short of imposing new taxes on the industry, there may be little Congress can do to reverse its earlier giveaways. The new projections come at a moment when President Bush and Republican leaders are on the defensive about record-high energy prices, soaring profits at major oil companies and big cuts in domestic spending.<br /><br />Indeed, <span style="font-weight:bold;font-style:italic;">Mr. Bush and House Republicans are trying to kill a one-year, $5 billion windfall profits tax</span> for oil companies that the Senate passed last fall.<br /><br />Moreover, the projected largess could be just the start. Last week, Kerr-McGee Exploration and Development, a major industry player, began a brash but utterly serious court challenge that could, if it succeeds, cost the government another $28 billion in royalties over the next five years.<br />(Source: New York Times, Feb. 14, 2006 [emphasis added.])</blockquote>I wonder whether anyone else in the Gulf Coast region needs money as desperately as the highly profitable oil industry? Oh, yeah, almost forgot: <blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/14/national/nationalspecial/14hotels.html?ex=1297573200&en=f33142028727ffd9&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss">Hotel Aid Ends; Evacuees Seek Housing Again</a><br />By SHAILA DEWAN<br />NEW ORLEANS, Feb. 13 — Thousands of evacuees from Hurricane Katrina became transients again on Monday, wheeling their entire lives onto the street on luggage carts or dragging bulging garbage bags through hotel lobbies, when the federal government stopped paying their hotel bills.<br /><br />In the largest single step in its phaseout of emergency housing assistance for victims of the hurricane, the Federal Emergency Management Agency ended the hotel payments for 12,000 families across the country, including 4,400 now living in New Orleans.<br /><br />Most will get apartment rental assistance or trailers. Federal officials acknowledged Monday that hundreds of millions of dollars worth of mobile homes might never be used to house hurricane victims. <br />(Source: New York Times, Feb. 14, 2006)</blockquote>I wonder which Republican Pioneer-level donor has the mobile home concession? No doubt that donor makes plenty of speeches condemning wasteful government spending and giveaways to the undeserving. Oddly, I've never heard any of them apply these talking points to giving away gas and oil owned by the American people for free to the oil companies, who then charge us massive sums to buy back our own gas and oil...RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1138891358306727132006-02-02T11:38:00.000-03:002006-02-02T11:42:38.320-03:00Double-Standard Deflects PersecutionThe only way to avoid prosecuting a right-wing T-Shirt wearer was to drop charges against Cindy Sheehan. The important principle the founding Fathers most sincerely believed in, protecting the Imperial President's Bubble, was preserved: <blockquote>Late yesterday, after C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) had taken to the floor with an impassioned speech and his wife's T-shirt held aloft, Capitol Police Chief Terrance W. Gainer showed up at his office to apologize.<br /><br />(Source: Washington Post , Feb 2, 2006)http://www.blogger.com/img/gl.link.gif<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/01/AR2006020100348.html"></a></blockquote>RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1138373283875116422006-01-27T11:41:00.000-03:002006-01-27T11:48:03.893-03:00Repubs Begin Moving Away From "In Your Face" CorruptionLooks like the light of public attention is making these cockroaches scurry back to the shadows:<blockquote>Yesterday, the staff director of the Senate Republican Conference said that a K-Street-job-vacancies memo -- the heart of Congress's remaining involvement in the effort these days -- will no longer be distributed during high-level meetings hosted by the conference on Capitol Hill between lawmakers and lobbyists. Responsibility for the listings migrated from the House to the Senate several years ago, according to lobbyists.<br /><br />While lobbyists and others could still obtain the information elsewhere, the change removes the formal involvement of lawmakers from the process and any implied encouragement by them to transform K Street into a Republican bastion.<br />(Source: Washington Post <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/25/AR2006012502240.html">GOP Freezes Jobs List, a Vestige of the K Street Project</a>, Jan 26, 2006.)</blockquote>Note, please, that they're still doing it - just not quite so openly...RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1138200408506617792006-01-25T11:41:00.000-03:002006-01-25T11:47:38.513-03:00Government by DistractionYet more evidence that the Republicans knew there was massive corruption in the Bush League's Coalition Provisional Authority (misnamed "CPA") and decided to launch an over-hyped investigation into the UN "Oil for Food" plan to distract the voters from their own, far more serious scandals: <blockquote><b><a href="http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4646442.stm">Cash meant for Iraqis 'misused'</a></b><br /><br />Large bundles of cash meant for Iraq's reconstruction were stashed in filing cabinets, handed over without receipts and gambled away, a report has found.<br /><br />The audit, by US-appointed inspectors, paints a picture of the chaotic misuse of millions of dollars of funds.<br /><br />The lack of oversight had a tragic outcome in one case, when a hospital lift, supposed to have been fixed, crashed killing three people.<br /><br />The report said US post-war planning was limited by a desire for secrecy.<br /><br />There were no detailed, overt preparations for the reconstruction of Iraq in the run-up to the 2003 invasion "to avoid the impression that the US government had already decided on [military] intervention", the report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction (SIGIR) said.<br /><br />Nevertheless, the US has allocated billions of dollars to rebuilding Iraq, and large amounts have been raised through the sale of Iraqi oil. <br />(Source: BBC News, Jan 25, 2006 [emphasis in original])</blockquote>Wasn't Hillary Clinton visiting Iraq during some of this? Maybe she should be investigated...RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1137872925660731482006-01-21T16:25:00.000-03:002006-01-21T16:48:45.730-03:00What the Bush Regime Looks Like to OthersBizarre ideological battles from the past, disdain for international law, claiming political opponents and moderates are traitors - is Karl Rove moonlighting in Iran? <blockquote> Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has steered his country of 70 million people on a sharply confrontational course with much of the outside world after only six months in office.<br /><br />Tehran this month restarted activities that Western experts believe could lead Iran to acquire a nuclear bomb in coming years.<br /><br />The nuclear drive has garnered the headlines and diplomatic attention, but "the problem is broader," U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried said in a Jan. 18 speech. "Not only is the regime in Tehran determined to develop nuclear weapons, it also supports terrorism. Not only does it support terrorism, the regime is hostile to democracy in principle. Ahmadinejad's bizarre remarks about destroying Israel remind one of another era."<br />(Source: Knight Ridder News <a href="http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13674937.htm">Iran presents a pressing new challenge for the U.S.</a>,Jan. 20, 2006)</blockquote>It appears Iran's current president is as unpopular with the iranian public as the Bush regime is with US voters: <blockquote>Instead, the administration's policy review, led by Rice, is considering new ways of reaching out to the Iranian people - many of whom despise the regime - through increased broadcasting into Iran and more cultural exchanges, a senior U.S. official said recently. He requested anonymity because the review isn't complete.<br />(<a href="http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/13674937.htm">Iran presents a pressing new challenge for the U.S.</a>)</blockquote>RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1137470547190859272006-01-17T00:38:00.000-03:002006-01-17T01:02:27.276-03:00Massive NSA Wiretapping Both Illegal and IneffectiveWhy is it that W and his Bush League minions feel that if an action is morally repugnant and/or flat-out illegal, it must by necessity be highly effective? First, they went on a torture binge that yielded a bunch of bogus data. Now, it seems that their illegal wiretapping was a massive and expensive waste of time and resources, too: <blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/17/politics/17spy.html">Spy Agency Data After Sept. 11 Led F.B.I. to Dead Ends</a><br />By LOWELL BERGMAN, ERIC LICHTBLAU, SCOTT SHANE and DON VAN NATTA Jr.<br /><br />WASHINGTON, Jan. 16 - In the anxious months after the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency began sending a steady stream of telephone numbers, e-mail addresses and names to the F.B.I. in search of terrorists. The stream soon became a flood, requiring hundreds of agents to check out thousands of tips a month.<br /><br />But virtually all of them, current and former officials say, led to dead ends or innocent Americans.<br />...<br />President Bush has characterized the eavesdropping program, which focused on the international communications of some Americans and others in the United States, as a "vital tool" against terrorism; Vice President Dick Cheney has said it has saved "thousands of lives."<br /><br />But the results of the program looked very different to some officials charged with tracking terrorism in the United States. More than a dozen current and former law enforcement and counterterrorism officials, including some in the small circle who knew of the secret eavesdropping program and how it played out at the F.B.I., said <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">the torrent of tips led them to few potential terrorists inside the country they did not know of from other sources and diverted agents from counterterrorism work they viewed as more productive</span>.<br /><br />"We'd chase a number, find it's a school teacher with no indication they've ever been involved in international terrorism - case closed," said one former FBI official, who was aware of the program and the data it generated for the bureau. <span style="font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">"After you get a thousand numbers and not one is turning up anything, you get some frustration."</span><br />(Source: <i>New York Times</i> Jan 17, 2005 [emphasis added.])</blockquote>It appears the only reason W and his Bush League minions pushed this policy was to roll back the post-Watergate restrictions on the Imperial Presidency. The Bush regime cares nothing about our country, our beliefs, or our freedoms. They only care about maintaining and increasing their own power.RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7847271.post-1137467966031340482006-01-17T00:09:00.000-03:002006-01-17T00:19:26.070-03:00Bush Urges Foxes to Do a Better Job Guarding ChickensAfter having the pharmaceutical industry write their dream "Medicare Drug Coverage" plan, and tricking the Republican Congress into enacting Big Pharma's dream, W is shocked, SHOCKED to discover it isn't working well: <blockquote><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/16/politics/16drug.html">President Tells Insurers to Aid Ailing Medicare Drug Plan</a><br />By ROBERT PEAR<br /><br />With tens of thousands of people unable to get medicines promised by Medicare, the Bush administration has told insurers that they must provide a 30-day supply of any drug that a beneficiary was previously taking, and it said that poor people must not be charged more than $5 for a covered drug.<br /><br />The actions came after several states declared public health emergencies, and many states announced that they would step in to pay for prescriptions that should have been covered by the federal Medicare program.<br /><br />Republicans have joined Democrats in asserting that the federal government botched the beginning of the prescription drug program, which started on Jan. 1. People who had signed up for coverage found that they were not on the government's list of subscribers. Insurers said they had no way to identify poor people entitled to extra help with their drug costs. Pharmacists spent hours on the telephone trying to reach insurance companies that administer the drug benefit under contract to Medicare.<br /><br />Many of the problems involve low-income people entitled to both Medicare and Medicaid.<br />...<br />The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, said the mismanagement of the program had had "devastating consequences for seniors." In a letter signed by 34 other Democrats, Mr. Reid said, "We want to know why so many of our constituents have fallen through the cracks." Democrats had predicted many of the problems, he said.<br /><br />The concern was bipartisan. Senator Judd Gregg, Republican of New Hampshire, said many people had been "turned away at their pharmacies or told that they must purchase the drugs up front and seek reimbursement later."<br /><br />"These are very vulnerable people who do not have the means to pay for their prescriptions and who cannot go without their medications," Mr. Gregg said.<br />(Source: <i>New York Times</i> Jan. 16, 2006)</blockquote>Wow, a Republican plan that enriches large corporations while harming the poor - whoever would have guessed?RepubAnonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00910850871992862642noreply@blogger.com0