tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-61445777540997371542024-03-07T23:18:28.859+04:00Independents UnboundThoughts, observations, opinions and rants from small "i" independents, who usually decide the more important elections in America. Now, we are taking names and kicking ass; all year, every year!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2724125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-83716190408246688072009-06-20T06:41:00.004+04:002009-06-20T21:58:47.487+04:00Sweet Geebus! Just When One Thinks It Can't Get Any Worse.<span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br />Yet another example of the results of tyranny, even unto death. The persecuted become persecutors, the terrorized become merchants of terror, the oppressed become the oppressors, etc.<br /><br /></span><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-style: italic;">Seems obvious by now that it isn't a real good idea to give victims a state of their own and a license to kill any and all, and by any means, of their "enemies, who surround them.<br /><br />In my lifetime, there have been a remarkable number of tyrants who have distinguished themselves in the school of evil. Yes, there was Hitler, before I was born but the worst of the worst, at least so I was taught as a child. We defeated him by joining up with Joe Stalin, who may have killed more of his own people that Hitler did. Then there was Castro, Pol Pot, several dirt-bags to our South, if not in our own South, Saddam Hussein, numerous torture- for-hire governments around the middle east and Central Asia.<br /><br />None, no matter how many gruesome acts the may have committed, have ever been thought of like Hitler. Their acts were every bit as gruesome and illegal as those of Hitler and his Third Reich, yet to many Americans they are only footnotes in history, if that.<br /><br />No other "victims" in history have been given their own state, let alone a state based on religion, propped up by the U.S. at every turn even when the governments of Israel have committed war crimes and are guilty of having nuclear weapons, in defiance of the non-proliferation treaty which we signed.<br /><br />Lately, it was revealed that an infamous NeoCon asserted that anyone criticizing the NeoCons is anti-semetic.<br /><br />Gee. seems only yesterday that one was anti-semetic only when one questioned the policies of the Israeli government, at any given time. Now not even the almighty Neocons can be questioned without the threat of the most unholy of all labels, "anti-semetic."<br /><br />My mother taught me waht the phrase, "Never Again" means. "Never again" means we will not stand by and watch a whole group of people attacked and damned near wiped out by other people who are mad with fear and hatred.<br /><br />So, are the Palestinians the present day Jews?<br /><br />What's the point in gaining knowledge if we refuse to use it on the big problems that seem to have plagued us since the beginning of history?</span><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br /><br /><br /></span></span><div class="navigation"> <div class="alignleft">« <a href="http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2009/06/10/patrick-fitzgeralds-private-jihad/">Patrick Fitzgerald’s Private Jihad</a></div> </div> <div class="date"><br />17 <strong>Jun</strong> </div> <h3 class="posttitle"><span style="font-size:85%;"><a href="http://www.roryoconnor.org/blog/2009/06/17/censoring-pro-palestinian-political-messages/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent Link: Censoring Pro-Palestinian Political Messages?">Censoring Pro-Palestinian Political Messages?</a></span></h3> <p style="font-weight: bold;">Was it policy or pressure that led Lamar Outdoor Advertising to tear down billboards featuring a pro-Palestinian political message?</p> <p>Judge for yourself. Lamar, which operates over 150 outdoor advertising companies in more than 40 states and Puerto Rico, entered into an eight week contract in April with a local New Mexico grassroots group called the <a href="http://stop30billion.blogspot.com/"><em>Coalition to Stop $30 Billion to Israel</em></a> to provide ten billboards throughout the Albuquerque area. <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Each carried this message: “Tell Congress: Stop Killing Children. No More Military Aid to Israel.”</span></p> <p>Motivated by concern over an Israeli military incursion into Gaza that left more than 1400 Palestinians dead – most civilians — and another 5,000 injured, Coalition members paid for the messages to register their objection to a 2007 Bush Administration Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion U.S. taxpayer dollars to Israel over a ten-year period – an understanding that the Obama Administration has now adopted as its own. Much of the money will be used to purchase American-made weapons.</p> <p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Surprisingly, after just three weeks, the billboards were abruptly taken down. </p> <p>Coalition leaders say correspondence they received from Lamar executives indicated they had removed the billboards – despite the fact that the company’s own graphics department had designed them in cooperation with the Coalition — after having received numerous complaints. Nonetheless, the Coalition and Lamar’s corporate officers agreed on May 18 to a modified redesign of the billboards.</p> <p>But just one week later, Lamar officials turned around again and rescinded their approval. Coalition members say they were told that the company’s switchboard had been inundated with phone calls objecting to the billboards. </p> <p>Lamar’s Vice President of Governmental Relations Hal Kilshaw says there’s no conspiracy or censorship at play, however. Instead, Kilshaw offers a much simpler explanation for the contretemps: “We made a mistake – twice!”</p> <p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Both the original and the revised billboards violated the firm’s Copy Acceptance Policy, Kilshaw says, since it prohibits “misleading and offensive” advertising. The first effort was misleading, he explains, “because Congress is not killing children.” And the second was offensive, “because it still had a picture of a young girl and a tank.”</p> <p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Yet Kilshaw’s explanation raises as many questions as it answers. If the first design was so “misleading,” why did Lamar agree to accept it in the first place? And why did it stay up for three weeks? “We erred,” Kilshaw says steadfastly. “We might have had an over-zealous ad salesperson. But we took it down after it was brought to the attention of the General Manager in Albuquerque.” </p> <p>What about the second design – also created in concert with Lamar executives? “We erred again in approving a redesign and then modifying it,” Kilshaw explains. “There was some interim wrangling, we agreed to change it – and then upon re-thinking, decided the revision was offensive.”</p> <p>Asked what Lamar officials found so “offensive” about the second design, Kilshaw said there is “no black and white way to define what is ‘offensive,’ but like the Supreme Court once said about pornography, I know it when I see it.”</p> <p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Following their second ‘error,’ Lamar executives came back with three other proposed designs:</p> <p>“We rejected each and every one of these choices,” says Coalition spokesperson Rich Forer. “None had any images. We asked Lamar to include an image of a tank to accompany very similar wording in the three choices Lamar offered us. We also told them an image would not be necessary if they included the following two phrases: ‘military aid’ and ‘tax dollars.’ All of these suggestions were unacceptable to them - despite the fact is the U.S. has agreed to give $30 billion dollars of taxpayer money to Israel over ten years for military spending, and Israel in return must spend about 76% of the money on U.S. made weapons. So using ‘tax dollars’ and ‘military aid’ are unequivocally accurate.”</p> <p><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Earlier this month, negotiations finally reached an impasse.</span> The design that Lamar proposed was unacceptable to the Coalition, which regarded its message as “too watered down and almost meaningless,” and found it “vague and missing key elements to the message central in our campaign to end the cycle of military violence in this conflict.”</p> <p><span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">As Coalition member Rita Erickson explained to Lamar executives in an email: “If there were no occupation and oppressive living conditions for Palestinians, there would be no conflict; hence, the impression that we appear to be more sympathetic to Palestinians than Israeli Jews.” </span>But Erickson, like Forer, was also quick to note, “We sincerely care about the human rights of both and are very clear that the occupation is not in Israel’s best interests.”</p> <p style="font-weight: bold; color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">In a last-ditch attempt at compromise, the Coalition sent still more possible choices for billboards:</p> <p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">1. Tell Congress: No More Tax Dollars for Military Aid to Israel<br />(No Image Necessary)<br />2. Tell Congress: Stop Giving Taxpayer Dollars to Israel<br />(image of tank included)<br />3. Tell Congress: No More Military Aid to Israel<br />(image of tank included)<br />4. Any of the above messages with an image of an Israeli woman on one side and a Palestinian woman on the other side </p> <p>The emailed response from Lamar? “Sorry original copy as proposed only.”</p> <p>All of the Coalition’s money has now been refunded, and Company executives say they reserve the right to reject advertising for any reason whatsoever. But Hal Kilshaw wants to make it clear that “We don’t make decisions on political grounds here.” Acknowledging the company had received “lots of comments,” he says he understands “why the Coalition might think this is political, but it’s not. We don’t disagree with their message - it just violates our copy acceptance policy.”</p> <p>Coalition members aren’t so sure, however. “Their local executive told us they took the first one down because of complaints,” says Rich Forer. “As for the second design, someone — either from the company or an infiltrator within our Coalition — must have notified people in the Jewish community, because there were lots of complaints about that one as well, even though it wasn’t made public!” <span style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Forer says information from Lamar employees indicates that pro-Israel groups “may have conducted a pressure campaign to get the billboards removed.” He and the others in the Coalition believe the protests were part of a deliberate and organized attempt to silence their right to free speech, and that Lamar is bowing to the pressure. They believe “a coordinated campaign to suppress the public’s right to be informed” about the Israeli Government’s policies and actions against the Palestinians has been waged against them.</span></p> <p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0); font-weight: bold;">“In contrast to the open debate about U.S.-Israel relations that occurs in much of the world, including Europe and even Israel,” the Coalition noted in a recent press release, “this level of censorship is all too common whenever somebody speaks out about Israel’s policies, the role of the U.S. in financing those policies and how, by doing so, the U.S. violates its own laws, specifically the Arms Export Control and Foreign Assistance Acts.”</p> <p style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">What do you think? Was it policy or pressure that caused Lamar to cancel its contract?</p> <p><em>The Coalition is now calling “on all people who are concerned about human rights to contact Lamar’s corporate offices and respectfully request they put the billboards back up as agreed to on May 18:</em></p> <p><em>Kevin P. Reilly, Jr., President and CEO<br />Lamar Outdoor Advertising - Corporate<br />Phone: (225) 926-1000<br />Email: twall@lamar.com<br />Mailing Address: P. O. Box 66338, Baton Rouge, LA 70896</em> </p><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br />(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><span style="font-size:130%;">The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.<br /></span><br /><br /></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-64258979613550047172009-06-20T06:37:00.004+04:002009-06-20T06:41:35.997+04:00Pap Smears and Proctology Exams For All Americans<span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;"><br /><span style="font-size:130%;">Could not resist the Analogy</span><br /><br /></span></span><h2 style="margin: 20px 0px 0px;"><span style="font-size:85%;">Warning: Health Care Lobbyists Are Winning the Battle to Screw All of Us</span></h2> <h5 style="margin: 0px 0px 20px;"><br /></h5><h5 style="margin: 0px 0px 20px;">By Marie Cocco, Washington Post Writers Group<br />Posted on June 18, 2009, Printed on June 19, 2009<br />http://www.alternet.org/story/140732/</h5> <p> </p><p>WASHINGTON -- You can't get there from here. Not if <em>there</em> is defined as health insurance coverage for everyone in the United States, lower costs for the millions of insured who are being crushed by its price, and relief for employers who are burdened by an expense many wish they could wipe off their books. And not if <em>here</em> is where the health insurance political debate is stuck.</p><p>At the moment, Republicans are gleeful and Democrats glum because of a Congressional Budget Office analysis -- based on an incomplete and early draft of what is likely to be the most liberal-leaning health care proposal to emerge from the Senate -- that shows the measure just won't get the job done. The budget office says the partial draft put together mainly by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., would reduce the number of uninsured by only about 16 million (out of upwards of 47 million) and cost about $1 trillion over the next decade. That's very little bang for a lot of bucks. But no one should be surprised at either number. For starters, candidate Barack Obama never ran on a platform to provide universal coverage. Of course he always said -- then and now -- that his goal is to cover everyone. But he has never put forward a concrete proposal for doing so, and hasn't endorsed a firm mandate that everyone purchase insurance. Remember those primary-season debates in which rivals Hillary Clinton and John Edwards criticized him for this? Attention should have been paid.</p><p>Now President Obama has left the legislative "details," as the White House likes to call them, to our esteemed lawmakers on Capitol Hill. This has fed an every-member-for-himself mentality, an instinct that needs no nourishment. Lawmakers of every political leaning are putting forward their own ideas, none of them as tough-minded or comprehensive as a single administration-initiated proposal might have been. Why? Because senators and members of the House represent discrete districts that are driven by their own local and political imperatives. They don't represent the country as a whole -- nor, when the subject is as complicated and has so many regional differences as health care, should we expect them to.</p><p>The result is a raft of proposals that are patch-and-fill jobs on the current system -- a system that pretty much everyone believes is crumbling to the point of collapse. This is an odd way to begin a major reconstruction project.</p><p>No one has seriously proposed concrete cost controls such as discount purchasing of prescription drugs by a government entity, which would demonstrably cut costs. In fact, the initial CBO analysis that my fellow liberals are so upset about shows not cost savings but a great deal of cost-shifting: The government would save money it now uses to subsidize tax-free insurance premiums, because some employees would drop workplace plans and purchase insurance through a new "exchange." But this savings would only partially offset the cost of providing subsidies to those who can't afford to purchase a policy outright. Meanwhile, the private insurance industry would continue to be the chief source of coverage -- and the only one, if the industry gets its way and Democrats produce legislation that does not create a public insurance plan as one purchase option.</p><p>Advocates of a single, national insurance system that would involve explicit cost controls and guidelines for care -- that might put an end to such wasteful practices as over-testing -- have been shunted aside. This is in part because Democrats quiver when Republicans call them "socialists." But Republicans cry "socialist" even when Democrats promote weak reforms that barely nick the vested interests. That's what's happening now. No one has seriously proposed an overhaul that would achieve what a single-payer system has been shown to accomplish in most other countries: universal coverage with lower costs that delivers better results than we now get in the United States.</p><p>Instead, Democrats have all but abandoned the idea that everyone be covered without exception. They've so far avoided endorsing clear cost-containment measures that would pass the budget-scorers' test of legitimacy. The wished-for savings that Obama says he wants the private insurance industry to achieve are exactly that -- wishes. The winners so far are health-industry lobbyists. They sense that their chances of protecting the interests of big insurers, drug companies, medical specialties, technology companies and the like are improving every day. They're probably right.</p><p>Marie Cocco's e-mail address is mariecocco(at)washpost.com.</p><p>(c) 2009, Washington Post Writers Group</p> <p><i> Marie Cocco is a prize-winning syndicated columnist on political and cultural topics for The Washington Post Writers Group. She is a frequent commentator on national TV and radio shows. </i></p> <h5 style="margin: 30px 0px 20px;">© 2009 Washington Post Writers Group All rights reserved.<br />View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/140732/</h5><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;"><br />(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-weight: bold; font-style: italic;">The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-78672229204030875442009-06-18T01:48:00.003+04:002009-06-18T01:52:54.835+04:00More Rethug Perversion....<p><br /></p><p style="font-weight: bold;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);">God, these people make me sick</span><br /></p><p style="font-weight: bold;">For those who demand accountability in public officials, take heart. There is one area, even in these permissive times, that always leads to political trouble and it is spelled <span style="font-size:180%;">s-e-x.</span></p><p>Republican Sen. John Ensign of Nevada, mentioned as a possible contender for the GOP’s big prize in four years, found that out the hard way. He announced this morning he was stepping down from his party leadership post, a day after admitting that he had an extramarital affair.</p><p>It is hard to imagine that sex is as powerful an issue in 2009 as some people thought it was in the past. (Those who think sex in government began with Bill Clinton really should go take a good American history course in summer school -- if you can find one that hasn’t been closed because of funding cuts.)</p><p> Still, in the world of Republicans, pro-family and generally religious (hence, pro-fidelity), an extramarital affair can be a problem. Especially when it comes to campaigns and raising money from the conservative base.</p><p>Ensign was head of the Republican Policy Committee, the fourth-ranking spot in the Senate leadership pantheon. Combining rugged good looks, a distinguished head of gray hair and a focused, conservative outlook, Ensign was a possible contender for the GOP presidential nod in four years.</p><p> On Tuesday, he said he had a “consensual affair” <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-ensign-affair17-2009jun17,0,6022581.story">from December 2007 to August 2008</a>. There has been no indication of why the senator decided to announce his infidelity when he did, prompting media speculation about a motive.</p><p> Ensign can take heart, however, America loves someone who can claim to be the comeback kid. There are worse political platforms.</p><p>--Michael Muskal</p><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br /><br />(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-75618977633391599242009-06-18T01:23:00.005+04:002009-06-18T01:45:31.958+04:00Public Healthcare, Socialism ands Such.<h2 class="title"><br /></h2><span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">There is a freakin' difference between Communism and Socialism!</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">There is a huge difference between Marxism/Communism and socialism; not to mention Capitalism.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Capitalism.....free markets....blah....blah....blah. What does free trade have to do with it.....have to do with it?</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">We do not have free trade, we haven't had for as long as I have lived; 60 years. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Free trade is not the same as fair trade. </span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">Bigger is not better! </span><br /></span><br /><h2 class="title"><span style="font-size:85%;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/16/clinton-health-care-meeting/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to 'Clinton Urges Obama To Stand Firm On A Strong Public Option: Don’t ‘Give Up The Store’ To Get 60 Votes'">Clinton Urges Obama To Stand Firm On A Strong Public Option: Don’t ‘Give Up The Store’ To Get 60 Votes </a></span></h2> <p><img src="http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/bloggersclintoncaption3.gif" alt="President Clinton with progressive bloggers" title="President Clinton with progressive bloggers" class="imgright" width="280" height="213" /><br /></p><p>Yesterday, ThinkProgress joined a group of other progressive bloggers for a meeting with President Clinton at his office in Harlem. Clinton opened the discussion with details about his <a href="http://www.clintonfoundation.org/">foundation work</a> on areas such as HIV/AIDS and global warming, and the struggles he is having attracting new donors during the economic downturn. </p> <p>Topics ranged from women’s rights to bridging the digital divide to the Waxman-Markey climate change legislation. Clinton also praised President Obama’s choice of Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the Supreme Court, saying that he thought “it was a good thing.” “Not just because she’s a woman, and Puerto Rican, and I know her and like her, and appointed her to the court…but I think it says that we’re going forward,” he said.</p> <p>But some of his most extensive comments came on the subject of health care. Clinton said that due to political and economic conditions, Obama has a far better chance of passing health care than he did in 1993:</p> <blockquote style="font-style: italic;"><p><strong>They’ve got a much different psychological and political landscape on which to operate.</strong> [...] <strong>Second, because of the current economic conditions, they don’t have the budget constraints I did.</strong> Keep in mind, I had just passed a budget in which we raised taxes on the wealthy, cut taxes on the working poor, and were on track to reducing the deficit, and there was no – we couldn’t raise taxes again. So when I had an employer-mandate, that in effect, guaranteed that the health insurance companies would be joined by the small business community – at least the organized small business community – which made it harder to pass. </p> <p><strong>Thirdly, he does not have a Republican leader who’s running for president.</strong> Bill Kristol sent Bob Dole a <a href="http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2008/1994health.html">letter</a> saying, “I know you like health care and I know you want to compromise with Bill Clinton” — which he told me he would do – “but if you let him pass anything, Democrats will be a majority for a generation. You’ve got to beat it off.” [...]</p> <p><strong>And finally – and most important of all – everything is worse now. </strong>The difference – the spread – in our spending and other people’s spending in ‘93, ‘94, was 14 percent of GDP on health care for us, 10 percent for our next highest competitor, Canada. Now the spread is 16 ½ to 11.</p></blockquote> <p>Clinton said that he believes Obama will work with the Senate to achieve the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster. But he urged Obama to be ready to use the <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/26/mccain-concedes-reconciliation/">budget</a> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/03/24/budget-reconciliation/">reconciliation</a> <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/05/04/baucus-public-health-care-plan-probably-wont-pass-without-budget-reconciliation/">process</a> — which would require just 51 votes to pass health care — if necessary to achieve a progressive bill: </p> <blockquote style="font-style: italic;"><p><strong>If he can’t get a good bill, I wouldn’t give away the store on that.</strong> If he can’t get a bill that’s genuine universal coverage, that genuinely is going to cut costs and make health insurers give up some of these unbelievable administrative burdens that they’ve put on people, and that really gets to the guts of the delivery system and does more primary preventive care and actually measures things that work, then I would go for the 51. But I would spend a little time trying to get to 60.</p></blockquote> <p>Listen here: </p> <center><object width="320" height="60"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/4OIPTzEB8OQ&hl=en&fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/4OIPTzEB8OQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="320" height="60"></embed></object></center> <p>Other bloggers at yesterday’s meeting were Chris Bowers of Open Left, who has a <a href="http://www.openleft.com/diary/13782/president-clinton-a-new-progressive-era">post</a> up about Clinton’s climate change remarks; Scott Lemieux of Lawyers, Guns and Money, who has a <a href="http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2009/06/clinton-be-bold-on-health-care.html">summary</a> of the discussion; and <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/6/16/742856/-Bloggers-%28me-too%29-meet-with-President-Clinton.-His-51-vote-healthcare-warning">nyceve</a> of Daily Kos and <a href="http://achronicdose.blogspot.com/2009/06/talking-health-reform-with-president.html">Laurie Edwards</a> of A Chronic Dose of Reality, both of whom reported on Clinton’s health care remarks.</p> <p>Transcript: <span id="more-45791"></span></p> <blockquote><p>CLINTON: <span style="font-style: italic;">First of all, one of the things I worry about with Congress is – You know that old parable about once a cat sits on a hot stove, the problem is it will never sit on a cold stove either? So you tend to assume that whatever the political landmines were in ‘93, ‘94 – when we were doing this – still exist. </span></p> <p style="font-style: italic;">Let me back up and say, when the Democrats won the Congress in 2006, the morning after the election I told Hillary – I said, “I don’t care what the mainstream, conventional wisdom is. You know, unless we nominate a bank robber, the nominee of the Democratic party will be the next president.” Because America has now – Mostly because starting in ‘98, we had heavy majority support for not only the performance of the administration, but basically for the philosophy of – it wasn’t necessarily more left, it was more communitarian, the idea that we had to go forward together. That we couldn’t stand this level of inequality, we couldn’t stand this level of social division. </p> <p>SPEAKER: <span style="font-style: italic;">Common good. </span></p> <p>CLINTON<span style="font-style: italic;">: Yeah. And that began to be the operative mode of America. It was truncated by 9/11. Even in 2002, you go back and look at the New York Times survey. … It was three weeks before the election. It said that undecided voters by a 20-something percent margin, other things being equal, would like to vote for a Democrat for Congress because they thought the Bush administration was going to far to the right. The only reason they won seats in 2002 was because they made up that homeland security issue. It was just made up out of whole cloth. </span></p> <p style="font-style: italic;">Then in 2004, President Bush won re-election, but it was the smallest victory margin of any president re-elected since Woodrow Wilson in 1916 before World War I, and no wartime president had ever been defeated. In 2006, when the Democrats won, we were out of this 9/11 straight-jacket – emotional straight-jacket. And finally, we had seen what the consequences of what had been advocated, in terms of cultural divisions, since Nixon’s election in ‘68; in terms of economic and social divisions since Reagan’s election in ‘80. Those guys all got a free ride because the Democrats in Congress blocked what they wanted to do. We never got to see how it would work until President Bush got a Republican Congress. So we then became more communitarian. </p> <p style="font-style: italic;">Therefore, President Obama and the Congress – they need to know this. They’ve got a much different psychological and political landscape on which to operate. It doesn’t mean that people still aren’t skeptical of government, it doesn’t mean that people still can’t buy into these other arguments. But it’s a different landscape. First.</p> <p style="font-style: italic;">Second, because of the current economic conditions, they don’t have the budget constraints I did. Keep in mind, I had just passed a budget in which we raised taxes on the wealthy, cut taxes on the working poor, and were on track to reducing the deficit, and there was no – we couldn’t raise taxes again. So when I had an employer-mandate, that in effect, guaranteed that the health insurance companies would be joined by the small business community – at least the organized small business community – which made it harder to pass. </p> <p style="font-style: italic;">Thirdly, he does not have a Republican leader who’s running for president. Bill Kristol sent Bob Dole a letter saying, “I know you like health care and I know you want to compromise with Bill Clinton” — which he told me he would do – “but if you let him pass anything, Democrats will be a majority for a generation. You’ve got to beat it off.” And then we just had an automatic filibuster for everything. So you don’t have any of that; all that stuff’s gone. </p> <p style="font-style: italic;">And finally – and most important of all – everything is worse now. The difference – the spread – in our spending and other people’s spending in ‘93, ‘94, was 14 percent of GDP on health care for us, 10 percent for our next highest competitor, Canada. Now the spread is 16 ½ to 11. That’s $800 billion a year that we’re just throwing away because we’re not getting – Nobody else insures less than 100 percent. We’ve got what, 45 million people uninsured?</p> <p>SPEAKER:<span style="font-style: italic;"> 50. </span></p> <p style="font-style: italic;">CLINTON: get worse health outcomes. So it’s all worse. [...] </p> <p style="font-style: italic;">Even the health insurance companies say they’ve got to try to [pass it], number one. Number two, the small business community is not a guaranteed opposition. Number three, the American Medical Association says they’re against a public plan, but that’s because they think they get underpaid for Medicare and Medicaid. We’ll come back to that. And number four, we’ve got a more modern, more supportive Congress. So I think all that argues that we could get u50. Whatever it is. Huge number. And we don’t get better health outcomes; we niversal coverage. But the problem is, they’ve got to change the delivery system enough to get costs down so that we’ll still have universal coverage five years from now. </p> <p style="font-style: italic;">Keep in mind we have to examine this health care thing in light of all – And let me just say, I strongly supported the President’s stimulus program and the general outlines of what they’re trying to do on housing, and financing, and automobiles, and everything else. But because President Bush – because of the recession and because President Bush passed all those tax cuts for upper-income people like me, which I opposed – we had to borrow the money to do all this. And that’s why you see – I don’t know if you’ve been watching this, but the interest rates are creeping back up now, and people may be more reluctant to buy our debt, so that’s why President Obama went to Green Bay, WI, which has a good health care delivery system and is getting better results at lower costs to do it. [...]</p> <p style="font-style: italic;">The other thing that people keep talking about is how complicated my bill was. You know, there’s a reason President Obama hasn’t presented a bill here. The fact is, my bill replaced hundreds of more pages of federal law than it added. It was a net simplification of the current system. The current system looks like Rube Goldberg on steroids. And so – But he’s not going to have to worry about – I think we’re going to get past the filibuster, and I think they’ll be tough enough to go to 51 votes. But they would prefer, for his long-term relationships with Congress, it would be better if we could get the 60 votes. So what I think they’ll do is go for the 60, but if it seems that people are just dug in taking positions that don’t make any sense, then I think they’ll go back to plan B. That would be my preference, because he’s got to think about what it’s going to be like next year, and the year after, and the year after, and all of that. </p> <p style="font-style: italic;">CHART: Wouldn’t it be nice to win one of these once in awhile? </p> <p style="font-style: italic;">CLINTON: What?</p> <p style="font-style: italic;">CHART: Wouldn’t it be nice to just win, instead of thinking about the 60 votes and the relationships?</p> <p style="font-style: italic;">CLINTON: No, no. I think he will win. If he can’t get a good bill, I wouldn’t give away the store on that. If he can’t get a bill that’s genuine universal coverage, that genuinely is going to cut costs and make health insurers give up some of these unbelievable administrative burdens that they’ve put on people, and that really gets to the guts of the delivery system and does more primary preventive care and actually measures things that work, then I would go for the 51. But I would spend a little time trying to get to 60. </p></blockquote><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br /><br />(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-20994012729797510282009-06-15T21:10:00.001+04:002009-06-18T01:22:29.267+04:00Expert Advice On Dealing With A Prior Administration's Use of Torture<span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0);">By John Dean</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">From The Archives:</span><br /><table><tbody><tr><td class="wititle"><br /><br /></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="wauthor"><a href="http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean" class="graybold">By JOHN W. DEAN<br /></a></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="widate">Friday, June 12, 2009</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <p style="font-weight: bold;">No official announcement has been made that the Obama Administration is not going to prosecute anyone – other than a few low-level soldiers who photographed themselves and already have been prosecuted – for torturing detainees in our so-called war on terror. But it has become clear that President Obama's announced desire to look forward, not backward, embodies such a decision. </p> <p> Still, we must all hope that the Obama Administration makes more than a non-decision type of decision, and does not merely resolve the matter by silence and inaction. There are, in fact, precedents, and studies, that illuminate the grave problems confronting a democracy in making a choice when faced with the options of prosecuting and punishing versus forgiving and forgetting. I discovered this material some years ago when studying authoritarian governance. </p> <!-- 300x250 AD --> <p><strong>The Insights of Samuel P. Huntington</strong></p> <p> I provided evidence in my recent book <em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0670037745/sr=8-1/qid=1153584372/findlaw-20">Conservatives Without Conscience</a></em> that the Bush/Cheney presidency was the most authoritarian in American history. When doing research for that book, I read a work by the late <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/29/education/29huntington.html">Samuel P. Huntington</a>, the highly- regarded Harvard political scientist and former president of the American Political Science Association. More specifically, I was interested in Professor Huntington's survey of the transition to democracy, during the mid-1970s through the 1980s, of some thirty countries that had previously been under authoritarian rule, which Huntington wrote about in <em><a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=6REC58gdt2sC&dq=The+Third+Wave:+Democratization+In+the+Late+Twentieth+Century&printsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&ei=WVUwStvgFqeWswO--f3vAw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4">The Third Wave: Democratization In the Late Twentieth Century</a></em>. </p> <p> Professor Huntington, who once served as a foreign policy adviser to Democratic presidential candidate Hubert Humphrey, was respected across the political spectrum, as conservative columnist <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-oe-goldberg30-2008dec30,0,4020843.column">Jonah Goldberg</a> noted on his passing. Huntington called it as he saw it, and few have studied more governments so closely throughout the world.</p> <p>When writing <em>The Third Wave</em>, Huntington explained that rather than following his normal practice of detached political analysis, he would explain the implications of his findings at five points in the book, where he "abandoned the roles of social scientist, [and] assumed that of [a] political consultant." It was in this context that Huntington addressed how a democratic government should deal with torture that had occurred under the rule of an authoritarian predecessor. </p> <p><strong>Applying Huntington's Insights to the Obama Administration's Predicament</strong></p> <p>While the situations are far from directly parallel, Huntington's analysis strikes me as relevant to our current situation. Thus, in the following paragraphs, I have paraphrased or quoted his work, and occasionally transposed it from the context of a purely authoritarian government to that of the authoritarian-leaning democracy favored by many conservatives, and encouraged by Bush/Cheney, and to the situation now faced by the United States and by the Obama Administration. </p> <p>In turning to Huntington's analysis, I am not, of course, equating the American conservative authoritarianism with the authoritarianism the professor examined under the Central American and Asian dictatorships, or the Greek military, and similar authoritarian regimes. Nor is the situation parallel when American voters rejected the policies of the Republican Party by electing President Obama.</p> <p>By the same token, no one should be surprised that torture occurred when American conservatives ruled in an authoritarian manner. Nor, given the fact that Obama campaigned by opposing such authoritarian actions, it should not be surprising that many of his supporters, who voted the authoritarians out of power in Washington, now want him to prosecute and punish those involved. </p> <p>I found Huntington's work both provocative and illuminating in the context of the current situation that Obama faces in dealing with the use of torture by his predecessor. Especially given the fact we have never faced this situation before in the United States, but similar situations have existed in many other nations, the professor's advice is instructive. </p> <p><strong>The Case for Prosecuting and Punishing the Use of Torture</strong></p> <p>Based on Huntington's analysis, which is applicable to our country as well as to a newly-established democracy, there are a number of arguments for holding a prior administration accountable for torture through prosecutions and punishments:</p> <p>(1) "Truth and justice require it." The Obama Administration "has the moral duty to punish vicious crimes against humanity.</p> <p>(2) "Prosecution is a moral obligation owed to the victims and their families."</p> <p>(3) "Democracy is based on law, and the point must be made that neither high officials nor [the] military … are above the law." Citing a judge who was critical of a government amnesty proposal, Huntington added: "Democracy isn't just freedom of opinion, the right to hold elections, and so forth. It's the rule of law. Without equal application of the law, democracy is dead. The government is acting like a husband whose wife is cheating on him. He knows it, everybody knows it, but he goes on insisting that everything is fine and praying every day that he isn't going to be forced to confront the truth, because then he'd have to do something about it."</p> <p>(4) "Prosecution is necessary to deter further violations of human rights by [future] officials."</p> <p>(5) "Prosecution is essential to establish the viability of the democratic system." If the Republicans and Bush/Cheney apologists can prevent prosecution though political influence, democracy does not really exist.</p> <p>(6) Even if the worst "crimes are not prosecuted, at a very minimum it is necessary to bring into the open the extent of the crimes and the identity of those responsible and thus establish a full and unchallengeable public record. The principle of accountability is essential to democracy, and accountability requires 'exposing the truth' and insisting 'that people not be scarified for the greater good…'." </p> <p><strong>The Case for Forgiving and Forgetting the Use of Torture</strong></p> <p>Huntington's analysis of the case for leaving a past government's torture in the past, and imposing no consequences, which is based on more extreme government authoritarianism, is not nearly as applicable as his arguments calling for prosecution. Thus, I have taken his core arguments against prosecuting and punishing, and restated them in a context that is more closely applicable to our country and the current situation:</p> <p>(1) A working democracy calls for reconciliation between major factions in society, who set aside divisions of the past.</p> <p>(2) There must be a tacit understanding in a democracy among those vying for power that there will be no retribution for past policies sincerely held by opponents. Democracies do not criminalize policy differences, and while the Obama Administration does not believe torture is an effective policy, and has rejected it, it understands that the Bush/Cheney Administration believed it necessary to protect Americans.</p> <p>(3) Because many Democrats were aware of the use of torture by the Bush/Cheney Administration -- specifically, Congressional Democrats who were briefed on its use -- it would be unfair to prosecute Republicans but not Democrats.</p> <p>(4) Torture was only used because it was sincerely believed it was necessary to deal with terrorism, and, whether wisely or unwisely, it was done to protect the United States.</p> <p>(5) Many Americans share in the guilt of the use of torture by the Bush/Cheney Administration. <a href="http://www.ap-gfkpoll.com/pdf/AP-GfK_Poll_Supreme_Court_Final_Topline.pdf">Recent polls</a> indicate that only 29 percent of Americans believe torture should never be used, and the rest have varying degrees of toleration for its use. Similarly, not even half of <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/67621.html">Americans polled</a> want an investigation into this matter.</p> <p>(6) Prosecuting and punishing those involved in the use of torture would provoke a bitter and divisive public debate, which would detract from the government's ability to deal with more pressing problems like the economy, healthcare, and America's dangerous budget deficits. It is more important to guarantee the human rights of people today and tomorrow, than to seek retroactive justice that could compromise the ability to deal with more immediate and difficult issues. </p> <p><strong>Professor Huntington's Advice</strong></p> <p>It is unfortunate that Samuel Huntington is no longer available to share his wisdom for addressing this situation facing the nation, and the Obama Administration. Clearly there are strengths and weaknesses in the arguments on both sides of this issue. Nonetheless, as I noted, Huntington did give his advice to those who were forming new democracies -- advice which he based on how the democracy was formed:</p> <p>(1) When the transition to democracy occurred through a process of transformation ("when the elites in power took the lead in bringing about democracy"), or through what he called transplacement ("when democratization resulted largely from joint action by government and opposition groups"), then Huntington advised those in power, "do not attempt to prosecute authoritarian officials for human rights violations. The political costs of such an effort will outweigh any moral gains."</p> <p>(2) If replacement – not transformation or transplacement -- occurred (that is if "opposition groups took the lead in bringing about democracy, and the authoritarian regime collapsed or was overthrown"), and if those in power felt it was "morally and politically desirable," then Huntington advised that they should "prosecute the leaders of the authoritarian regime promptly (within one year of your coming into power) while making clear that you will not prosecute middle- and lower-ranking officials."</p> <p>(3) Regardless of how the transition occurred, Huntington advised that those in power ought to "[d]evise a means to achieve a full and dispassionate public accounting of how and why the crimes were committed."</p> <p>(4) Throughout his analysis, Huntington points out, "on the issue of 'prosecute and punish vs. forgive and forget,'" that "each alternative presents grave problems, and that the least unsatisfactory course may well be: do not prosecute, do not punish, do not forgive, and, above all, do not forget."</p> <p>Huntington's advice, notwithstanding how the transition occurred during our last election, still appears very relevant to our democracy, which is the most advanced in the world. Personally, I find his arguments for prosecution stronger than those against it when those arguments are applied to the Bush/Cheney Administration. But since it appears the Obama Administration is not going to take such action, at a minimum the Administration should follow Huntington's counsel to find "a means to achieve a full and dispassionate public accounting," and should make certain that the means chosen is not understood as forgiving, which would allow the nation to quickly forget. </p><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </span><br /><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(153, 0, 0); font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.<br /><br /><br /></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-56600722570624283232009-05-24T20:27:00.002+04:002009-05-24T20:35:20.818+04:00Generals Find Suicide a Frustrating Enemy<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);">I, for one, am not in the least surprised by this. Our men and women in uniform, will do what they are ordered to do, for the national security, and because that's the way it is in the miltary. When, however, they begin to question the reason and laws behind that call to duty, they begin to get sick.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);">People, at least those who are not what we used to call sociopathic, are far more sickened by what they have done to others than by what was done to them, in most cases. That is the very definition of human decency and civilized behavior.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);"><br /></span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);">Our military has been, in a very deep and profound way, betrayed by the last adminisyration and we hope this one won't follow suit.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; "><br /><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">As Numbers Continue to Climb, Top Officers Meet Monthly to Look for Answers</span><br /><p><span style="font-size:-1;">By Ann Scott Tyson and Greg Jaffe<br />Washington Post Staff Writers<br />Saturday, May 23, 2009 <br /></span></p><p></p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">It was just past midnight in Afghanistan when Brig. Gen. Mark Milley appeared on the video screen in the Pentagon conference room to brief some of the Army's top generals on a sobering development: his unit's most recent confirmed suicide.</span></p><p>A 19-year-old private, working a night shift at his base, had shot himself a few weeks earlier. "There was no indication that he would harm himself, he had not been seen by the chaplain, no intimate relationships," Milley said, running through warning signs.</p><p>In the Pentagon, Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, the Army's vice chief of staff, homed in on one detail. The soldier worked a job that often entailed long, solitary hours. In scouring the Army's suicide statistics, Chiarelli had noticed a slight suicide increase among those who worked such positions. Milley said that going forward none of the 20,000 soldiers under his command would routinely work by themselves.</p><p>For more than two hours, Chiarelli, Army personnel chief Lt. Gen. Michael D. Rochelle and a roomful of other generals combed through the facts surrounding a dozen of the Army's latest suicides, with commanders from Afghanistan, Iraq, the Horn of Africa and bases throughout the United States participating in a video teleconference.</p><p>Such meetings are one piece of a broader effort to arrest the Army's rising suicide rate, which has surged to record levels in the past year. In 2008, 140 soldiers on active duty took their own lives, continuing a trend in which the number of suicides has increased more than 60 percent since 2003, surpassing the rate for the general U.S. population.</p><p>To deal with the problem, the Army has added to the ranks of mental health and substance abuse counselors. The service also required all units to cease operations for two to four hours to talk about suicide prevention in February and March.</p><p>Chiarelli's monthly meetings are the Army's way of sleuthing out patterns and identifying new policies to deal with the trend. In the most recent meeting, conducted last week, commanders were brutally candid about what went wrong -- a mental health screener who missed signs of distress; the failure to take notice when a normally reliable infantryman with three combat tours didn't show up for an Army school; the dangerous interactions of drugs, dispensed to help soldiers deal with combat stress, with caffeine and alcohol.</p><p>"It's the most gut-wrenching meeting I go to," Chiarelli said.</p><p>After the Afghanistan commander gave his briefing, it was Iraq's turn. Maj. Gen. Daniel P. Bolger described the case of a young soldier who shot himself this year. One aberration in the case: The soldier had received a waiver so that he could take a prescription drug to treat his attention-deficit problem. The drug "when added to caffeine, could cause sleep disorders, and a lack of sleep could lead to impulsive actions," the Iraq commander noted.</p><p>"There are a lot of those high-energy drinks being used over there," said Chiarelli, who spent two years in Iraq. "What is that stuff that people drink in Iraq?"</p><p>"Rip It," came the chorus around the room, referring to the energy drink that has 100 milligrams of caffeine per eight-ounce can (25 percent more than a can of Red Bull and roughly three times as much as an equivalent amount of Diet Coke). Chiarelli asked an Army doctor attending the meeting to work with his staff to create a simple chart listing the most common drugs that soldiers take for combat stress and explaining how the drugs interact with other substances. "I want it to be something an average platoon sergeant can use," Chiarelli said.</p><p>At times Army leaders were frustrated by cases that defied simple explanation. In other instances soldiers simply fell through the cracks. One senior sergeant who had deployed multiple times to Iraq confessed to a fellow soldier that he had frequent nightmares from his first tour. He was binge-drinking. The friend took away his personal gun but never mentioned the sergeant's struggles to commanders. A couple of days later, the sergeant didn't show up for his slot in an Army school.</p><p>The normally reliable sergeant's absence should have triggered a red flag, said the senior commander where the soldier was based. It was the second suicide the command had when a soldier was between jobs, and the commander promised that his unit will now maintain contact with troops as they are moving.</p><p>As the meeting stretched into its second hour, commanders identified other problems that needed to be fixed. In one case, a U.S.-based soldier who was taking antidepressants returned from his second Iraq tour and checked a box on his post-deployment health survey that he was feeling depressed. The screener who reviewed the form didn't refer the young soldier to the base's mental health counselors for help. A few months later, he took his own life.</p><p>The screener erred in not referring the soldier for treatment, said the Army general who briefed the case. But he also complained that the form that the military uses to assess soldiers returning from deployments is outdated and that its questions are overly broad. The questionnaire was developed in the wake of the Persian Gulf war. Chiarelli said he had been promised that a new form would be issued later this summer. "You'd think we would have done it already after seven years of war," he said.</p><p>The Army's biggest challenge is that its volunteer force is in uncharted territory. Many soldiers are now in the midst of their third or fourth combat tour, and Army surveys show that mental health deteriorates with each one. Senior Army officials said they are focusing more resources, including extra mental health counselors, where troops are returning from multiple deployments. This year, Fort Campbell, Ky., which is home to the frequently deployed 101st Airborne Division, has had 14 suicides.</p><p>"We probably don't know how many mental health care providers we need after eight years of war and three and four deployments," Chiarelli said.</p><p>Some of the best information the Army has comes from the individual case studies discussed at the monthly Pentagon conference. Before the meeting ended, Chiarelli pressed his field commanders and fellow Pentagon generals to make sure that the lessons from the 12 cases they had studied that day made their way out into the force.</p><p>"We can't just be players in a game of Clue here," he said. "We have to find a formalized way to get these lessons out."</p></span></div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></span></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)<br /><br /><br />The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-46086529142321030742009-05-17T00:41:00.003+04:002009-05-17T00:52:14.867+04:00The Truth About Richard Bruce Cheney<div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">He is an Freakin' Coward? He should be tried and imprisoned for the rest of his miserable life for what he has ordered done to others and the horrendous effects he has had on this nation.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; "><h2 style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 20px; line-height: 20px; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); "><br /></h2><h3 style="margin-top: 6px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0em; padding-right: 0em; padding-bottom: 0em; padding-left: 0em; font-family: 'Arial Narrow', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; line-height: 11px; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); "> Wednesday, May 13 2009, 5:32PM</h3><div id="share4104" class="shareBoxDrop" style="z-index: 444; position: absolute; margin-top: 6px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; border-top-width: 1px; border-right-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-left-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); border-right-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); border-bottom-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); border-left-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); padding-top: 4px; padding-right: 10px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 10px; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: rgb(233, 232, 205); background-image: url(http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/home_comments_preview_bg.jpg); background-repeat: repeat-x; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 11px; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 170px; visibility: hidden; background-position: 50% 100%; "><h5 style="display: block; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 4px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 3px; padding-left: 0px; text-align: right; text-decoration: none; font-size: 10px; font-weight: bold; font-family: 'Arial Narrow', 'Arial Thin', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "><a href="javascript:toggleBox('share4104',0);" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; "><img src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/close_13x14.gif" border="0" align="absmiddle" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /></a></h5><h6 style="display: block; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 4px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 3px; padding-left: 0px; text-decoration: none; font-size: 10px; font-weight: bold; font-family: 'Arial Narrow', 'Arial Thin', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "></h6><img src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/share_icon_digg.gif" width="20" height="20" hspace="2" align="absmiddle" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /><a href="http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/05/the_truth_about/&title=The%20Truth%20About%20Richard%20Bruce%20Cheney&topic=political_opinion" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: normal; "></a><br /><img src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/share_icon_delicious.gif" alt="" width="20" height="20" hspace="2" align="absmiddle" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /><a href="https://secure.del.icio.us/login?url=http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/05/the_truth_about/" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: normal; "></a><br /><img src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/share_icon_reddit.gif" alt="" width="20" height="20" hspace="2" align="absmiddle" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /><a href="http://reddit.com/submit?url=http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/05/the_truth_about/&title=The%20Truth%20About%20Richard%20Bruce%20Cheney" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: normal; "></a><br /><img src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/share_icon_facebook.gif" alt="" width="20" height="20" hspace="2" align="absmiddle" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /><a href="http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/05/the_truth_about/" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: normal; "></a><br /><img src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/share_icon_newsvine.gif" alt="" width="20" height="20" hspace="2" align="absmiddle" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /><a href="http://www.newsvine.com/_tools/seed?popoff=0&u=http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/05/the_truth_about/&h=The%20Truth%20About%20Richard%20Bruce%20Cheney" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: normal; "></a><br /><img src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site_images/share_icon_stumbleupon.gif" alt="" width="20" height="20" hspace="2" align="absmiddle" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /><a href="http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url=http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/05/the_truth_about/&title=The%20Truth%20About%20Richard%20Bruce%20Cheney" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; font-weight: normal; "></a><h6 style="border-top-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); display: block; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(143, 129, 100); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 4px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 3px; padding-left: 0px; text-decoration: none; font-size: 10px; font-weight: bold; font-family: 'Arial Narrow', 'Arial Thin', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "></h6><form action="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/site-functions/sendmail.php" method="post" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "><input name="SHARE_TO_EMAIL" maxlength="255" type="text" value="'To' Email Address" onclick="this.value='';this.onclick=null;" style="width: 120px; font-size: 9px; color: rgb(105, 105, 105); "><br /><input name="SHARE_FROM_NAME" maxlength="255" type="text" value="Your Name" onclick="this.value='';this.onclick=null;" style="width: 120px; font-size: 9px; color: rgb(105, 105, 105); "><br /><input name="SHARE_FROM_EMAIL" maxlength="255" type="text" value="Your Email Address" onclick="this.value='';this.onclick=null;" style="width: 120px; font-size: 9px; color: rgb(105, 105, 105); "><input type="submit" value="Send!" style="width: 40px; font-size: 10px; "><span class="shareDisclaimer" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 10px; font-family: 'Arial Narrow', 'Arial Thin', Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; "><strong></strong></span></form></div><div class="entrybody" style="margin-top: 8px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 6px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "><p><span class="mt-enclosure mt-enclosure-image" style="display: inline; "><img alt="cheney twn.jpg" src="http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/cheney%20twn.jpg" width="390" height="289" class="mt-image-right" style="float: right; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /></span><em>This is a guest post exclusive to </em>The Washington Note<em> by Col. Lawrence B. Wilkerson, who is former chief of staff of the Department of State during the term of Secretary of State Colin Powell. Lawrence Wilkerson is also Pamela Harriman Visiting Professor at the College of William & Mary.</em></p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Last night I was on Rachel Maddow's show on MSNBC at the top of the hour. But before I came on, through the earpiece I listened to the five minutes that Rachel sketched as a lead-in. Most of it was videotape from the last few days of former Vice President Dick Cheney extolling the virtues of harsh interrogation, torture, and his leadership. I had heard some of it earlier of course but not all of it and not in such a tightly-packed package.</span></p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Let's just say that five minutes of the Sith Lord was stunningly inaccurate.</span></p><div><iframe height="339" width="425" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/30711836#30711836" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe><p style="font-size: 11px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: rgb(153, 153, 153); margin-top: 5px; background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: transparent; text-align: center; width: 425px; background-position: initial initial; ">Visit msnbc.com for <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/" style="text-decoration: none !important; border-bottom-width: 1px !important; border-bottom-style: dotted !important; border-bottom-color: rgb(153, 153, 153) !important; font-weight: normal !important; height: 13px; color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; ">Breaking News</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration: none !important; border-bottom-width: 1px !important; border-bottom-style: dotted !important; border-bottom-color: rgb(153, 153, 153) !important; font-weight: normal !important; height: 13px; color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; ">World News</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration: none !important; border-bottom-width: 1px !important; border-bottom-style: dotted !important; border-bottom-color: rgb(153, 153, 153) !important; font-weight: normal !important; height: 13px; color: rgb(0, 51, 102); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; ">News about the Economy</a></p></div><p>So, when I got home last night, I thought long and hard about what I knew at this point in my investigations with respect to the former VP's office. Here it is.</p><p>First, more Americans were killed by terrorists on Cheney's watch than on any other leader's watch in US history. So his constant claim that no Americans were killed in the "seven and a half years" after 9/11 of his vice presidency takes on a new texture when one considers that fact. And it is a fact.</p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(204, 0, 0);">There was absolutely no policy priority attributed to al-Qa'ida by the Cheney-Bush administration in the months before 9/11. Counterterrorism czar Dick Clarke's position was downgraded, al-Qa'ida was put in the background so as to emphasize Iraq, and the policy priorities were lowering taxes, abrogating the ABM Treaty and building ballistic missile defenses.</span></p><p>Second, the fact no attack has occurred on U.S. soil since 9/11--much touted by Cheney--is due almost entirely to the nation's having deployed over 200,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and not to "the Cheney method of interrogation."</p><p>Those troops have kept al-Qa'ida at bay, killed many of them, and certainly "fixed" them, as we say in military jargon. Plus, sadly enough, those 200,000 troops present a far more lucrative and close proximity target for al-Qa'ida than the United States homeland. Testimony to that fact is clear: almost 5,000 American troops have died, more Americans than died on 9/11. Of course, they are the type of Americans for whom Cheney hasn't much use as he declared rather dramatically when he achieved no less than five draft deferments during the Vietnam War.</p><p>Third--and here comes the blistering fact--when Cheney claims that if President Obama stops "the Cheney method of interrogation and torture", the nation will be in danger, he is perverting the facts once again. But in a very ironic way.</p><p>My investigations have revealed to me--vividly and clearly--that once the Abu Ghraib photographs were made public in the Spring of 2004, the CIA, its contractors, and everyone else involved in administering "the Cheney methods of interrogation", simply shut down. Nada. Nothing. No torture or harsh techniques were employed by any U.S. interrogator. Period. People were too frightened by what might happen to them if they continued.</p><p>What I am saying is that no torture or harsh interrogation techniques were employed by any U.S. interrogator for the entire second term of Cheney-Bush, 2005-2009. So, if we are to believe the protestations of Dick Cheney, that Obama's having shut down the "Cheney interrogation methods" will endanger the nation, what are we to say to Dick Cheney for having endangered the nation for the last four years of his vice presidency?</p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 102, 102);">Li</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 102, 102);">kewise, what I have learned is that as the administration authorized harsh interrogation in April and May of 2002--well before the Justice Department had rendered any legal opinion--its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the U.S. but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qa'ida.</span></p><p>So furious was this effort that on one particular detainee, even when the interrogation team had reported to Cheney's office that their detainee "was compliant" (meaning the team recommended no more torture), the VP's office ordered them to continue the enhanced methods.<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);"> The detainee had not revealed any al-Qa'ida-Baghdad contacts yet.</span> This ceased only after Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, "revealed" such contacts. Of course later we learned that al-Libi revealed these contacts only to get the torture to stop.</p><p>There in fact were no such contacts. (Incidentally, al-Libi just "committed suicide" in Libya. Interestingly, several U.S. lawyers working with tortured detainees were attempting to get the Libyan government to allow them to interview al-Libi....)</p><p>Less important but still busting my chops as a Republican, is the damage that the Sith Lord Cheney is doing to my political party.</p><p>He and Rush Limbaugh seem to be its leaders now. Lindsay Graham, John McCain, John Boehner, and all other Republicans of note seem to be either so enamored of Cheney-Limbaugh (or fearful of them?) or, on the other hand, so appalled by them, that the cat has their tongues. And meanwhile fewer Americans identify as Republicans than at any time since WWII. We're at 21% and falling--right in line with the number of cranks, reprobates, and loonies in the country.</p><p>When will we hear from those in my party who give a damn about their country and about the party of Lincoln?</p><p>When will someone of stature tell Dick Cheney that enough is enough? Go home. Spend your 70 million. Luxuriate in your Eastern Shore mansion. Shoot quail with your friends--and at your friends.</p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Stay out of our way as we try to repair the extensive damage you've done--to the country and to its Republican Party.</span></p><p><strong>-- Lawrence Wilkerson</strong></p></div></span></div><div><br /></div>(<span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)<br /><br /><br />The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-34445826591664641792009-05-17T00:33:00.003+04:002009-05-17T00:41:15.620+04:00Dick Cheney, Torture, Iraq, and Valerie Plame<div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 12px; "><table width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="postHeader" style="color: rgb(85, 85, 85); position: relative; font-size: 12px; margin-bottom: 10px; "><h2 style="margin-top: 5px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: 12px; font-weight: normal; ">By: <a href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/author/63/" title="Posts by emptywheel" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 102); ">emptywheel</a> Friday May 15, 2009 2:32 pm</span><br /></h2></td><td width="20" valign="top" align="right"><div class="diggit" style="width: 51px; height: 52px; font-family: arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 80%; color: rgb(115, 105, 38); background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/shade-news.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; text-align: center; padding-top: 5px; line-height: -1; background-position: 0% 0%; "><b style="font-size: 160%; ">9</b><br />diggs<br /> <a href="http://digg.com/submit?url=http%3A%2F%2Femptywheel.firedoglake.com%2F2009%2F05%2F15%2Fdick-cheney-torture-iraq-and-valerie-plame%2F&title=Dick+Cheney%2C+Torture%2C+Iraq%2C+and+Valerie+Plame&bodytext=Dick+Cheney%2C+Torture%2C+Iraq%2C+and+Valerie+Plame" class="digglink" style="color: rgb(16, 92, 182); font-weight: bold; margin-top: 0px; padding-top: 0px; text-decoration: none; text-align: center; font-family: arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 85%; height: 25px; width: 51px; ">digg it</a></div></td></tr></tbody></table><div class="postContent" style="font-size: 1em; font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: rgb(68, 68, 68); margin-top: 0px; padding-left: 10px; "><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">I've been reluctant to embrace suggestions that torture, Iraq, and Valerie Plame were all going to coalesce into one linked story. After all, it would be too easy for me, of all people, to argue these stories were linked. But I increasingly suspect they are.</span></p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">First, let me pull together some data points.</span></p><p><strong>Nancy Pelosi and Bob Graham are linking the non-briefings on torture with the Iraq NIE</strong></p><p>Now that they are explicitly stating that CIA lied in its September briefings on torture, Nancy Pelosi and Bob Graham are also both linking those lies with the lies they were telling--at precisely the same time--in the Iraq NIE. <a href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/14/pelosi-cia-told-us-waterboarding-was-not-being-employed/" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">Here's</a> Pelosi:</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>Of all the briefings that I have received at this same time, earlier, they were misinforming the American people there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and it was an imminent threat to the United States. I, to the limit of what I could say to my caucus, told them, the intelligence does not support the imminent threat that this Administration is contending. Whether it's on the subject of what's happening in Iraq, whether it's on the subject of techniques used by the intelligence community on those they are interrogating, every step of the way, the Administration was misleading the Congress.</p><p>And that is the issue. And that is why we need a truth commission.</p></div></blockquote><p>And <a href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/15/graham-they-claimed-to-have-briefed-before-torture-did-not/" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">here's</a> Graham:</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>Yes, they're obligated to tell the full Intelligence Committee, not just the leadership. This was the same time within the same week, in fact, that the CIA was submitting its National Intelligence Estimate on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq which proves so erroneous that we went to war, have had thousands of persons killed and injured as a result of misinformation.</p></div></blockquote><p>Now, it's quite possible Graham and Pelosi are tying these two lies together just to remind reporters how unreliable the CIA is. Perhaps they're doing it to remind reporters of how they got burned leading into the Iraq War, trusting the spin of the Administration.</p><p>But perhaps they're trying to say there's a direct connection, an explicit one, between the NIE and torture. We know Ibn Sheikh al-Libi's claims appeared in there. Did anything that came out of Abu Zubaydah's interrogation? Or Ramzi bin al-Shibh? </p><p>Did CIA not reveal they were torturing detainees to dodge any question about the accuracy of claims about Iraq intelligence?</p><p><strong>The proposal to waterboard Muhammed Khudayr al-Dulaymi</strong></p><p>Then there's not just the revelation, by Charles Duelfer, but the <strong>timing</strong> he describes of OVP proposals to waterboard Muhammed Khudayr al-Dulaymi, a Mukhabarat officer. <span id="more-4133"></span>He says Dick Cheney's office proposed waterboarding the officer in late April to May 2003.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>At the end of April 2003, not long after the fall of Baghdad, U.S. forces captured an Iraqi who Bush White House officials suspected might provide information of a relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s regime. Muhammed Khudayr al-Dulaymi was the head of the M-14 section of Mukhabarat, one of Saddam’s secret police organizations. His responsibilities included chemical weapons and contacts with terrorist groups.</p><p>[snip]</p><p>Duelfer says he heard from “some in Washington at very senior levels (not in the CIA),” who thought Khudayr’s interrogation had been “too gentle” and suggested another route, one that they believed has proven effective elsewhere. “They asked if enhanced measures, such as waterboarding, should be used,” Duelfer writes. “The executive authorities addressing those measures made clear that such techniques could legally be applied only to terrorism cases, and our debriefings were not as yet terrorism-related. The debriefings were just debriefings, even for this creature.”</p><p>Duelfer will not disclose who in Washington had proposed the use of waterboarding, saying only: “The language I can use is what has been cleared.” In fact, two senior U.S. intelligence officials at the time tell The Daily Beast that the suggestion to waterboard came from the Office of Vice President Cheney.</p><p>[snip]</p><p>“Everyone knew there would be more smiles in Washington if WMD stocks were found,” Duelfer said in the interview. “My only obligation was to find the truth. It would be interesting if there was WMD in May 2003, but what was more interesting to me was looking at the entire regime through the slice of WMD.”</p><p>But, Duelfer says, Khudayr in fact repeatedly denied knowing the location of WMD or links between Saddam’s regime and al Qaeda and was not subjected to any enhanced interrogation. Duelfer says the idea that he would have known of such links was “ludicrous".</p></div></blockquote><p>Cheney's office was proposing the waterboarding of a Mukhabarat officer in April to May 2003. That's significant because Cheney wouldn't have had to work through the chain of command in the least to propose waterboarding this guy. He had a representative on the ground in Baghdad, closely involved in intelligence collection: Harold Rhode. (Those who know my work well will be smiling at this timing, but for now, I'll have to leave my treatment of Rhode and Kudhayr at that.)</p><p><strong>Dougie Feith has said his DOD intell office helped formulate policy on detainees</strong></p><p>As I reported last week, when asked specifically about how his little intelligence shop at DOD helped formulate policy, Feith <a href="http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/05/dougie-feiths-little-shop-of-tortures/" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">described</a> three ways:</p><ul><li>DoD response to the presence in Iraq of the al-Qaida affiliated Ansar al-Islam terrorist group.</li><li>DoD response to the presence in Iraq of al-Qaida operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his CB W network.</li><li>Helping to formulate requirements for the debriefings of al-Qaida fighters detained at Guantanamo and Bagram.</li></ul><p>Granted, Khudayr was not held at Gitmo or Bagram, nor did he have ties (AFAIK) to Ansar al-Islam or Zarqawi.</p><p>But Harold Rhode--who at the time OVP suggested Khudayr be waterboarded was in Baghdad--was Feith's deputy and tied to his intelligence shop. If Feith was involved in "formulating requirements for the debriefings of detainees" in Iraq at all, Rhode would have been the one on the scene to implement that policy.</p><p><strong>Dick Cheney outed Valerie Plame because of Joe--but also because of pushback at CIA</strong></p><p>There were two factors that led Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby--on the orders or George Bush--to target the Wilsons starting on June 9, 2003. The first was a series of articles--several of them written by Walter Pincus--describing doubts at CIA about Iraq intelligence.</p><p>On May 29, Pincus <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A51355-2003May28?language=printer" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">reported</a> with Karen DeYoung, "US Hedges on Finding Iraqi Weapons." It included a statement from Paul Wolfowitz (Feith's boss) that revealed a difference of opinion over things like Iraqi ties to Al Qaeda. </p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>Looking back at the spotlight the administration cast on the weapons issue in building its case for war, Wolfowitz said, "There was no oversell." But he acknowledged yesterday that there "had been a tendency to emphasize the WMD [weapons of mass destruction] issue" as the primary justification for war because of differences of opinion within the administration over the strength of other charges against the Iraqi government, including its alleged ties to al Qaeda.</p></div></blockquote><p>On May 31, Pincus had a scathing A1 article, "<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60022-2003May30?language=printer" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">Tenet Defends Iraq Intelligence</a>."</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>CIA Director George J. Tenet took the unusual step yesterday of publicly defending the agency's intelligence on Iraq's possession of chemical and biological weapons, amid growing criticism that the Bush administration exaggerated what it knew about Iraqi weapons programs to advance the case for going to war.</p></div></blockquote><p>The article revealed the three complaints to the CIA Ombud about politicized intelligence. </p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>Three complaints have been filed with the CIA ombudsman about the administration's possible politicization of intelligence on Iraq, an intelligence official said. He would not describe the substance of the complaints.</p><p>One senior administration official said CIA analysts have complained they felt pressured by administration policymakers who questioned them before the war about their assessment of Iraq's arms programs.</p></div></blockquote><p>It reported the first salvo from VIPS--the group of intelligence professional condemning the politicization of intelligence.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>Tenet's statement came in response to the release on Thursday of a "memorandum" to President Bush posted on several Internet sites by a group of retired CIA and State Department intelligence analysts. The analysts said there is "growing mistrust and cynicism" among intelligence professionals over "intelligence cited by you and your chief advisers to justify the war against Iraq."</p><p>The group, which calls itself Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, said the failure to find weapons of mass destruction after six weeks of searching "suggests either that such weapons are simply not there or that those eventually found there will not be in sufficient quantity or capability to support your repeated claim that Iraq posed a grave threat to our country's security."</p></div></blockquote><p>It targeted Feith's little intelligence shop and claims about ties to al Qaeda. </p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>But opponents of the war -- some from inside the government, others from outside -- expressed concern that the administration failed to make its case about Iraq's weapons programs, as well as the country's alleged ties to al Qaeda. Opponents focused much of their criticism on a Pentagon intelligence analysis unit established last year by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, who was among the administration's most prominent advocates for invading Iraq.</p></div></blockquote><p>And it repeated the reports of Cheney's (and Libby's) visits to CIA prior to the war.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>A senior administration official said that during the run-up to the war, the CIA's Iraq analysts had been questioned by administration policymakers, including Cheney. But the official added, "There is nothing wrong with them sitting down with analysts and asking them questions about how they know this or that."</p><p>Over the past year, Cheney has made "multiple trips to the CIA on many different subjects, including several times on Iraq," Cathie Martin, a Cheney spokeswoman, confirmed yesterday.</p></div></blockquote><p>Thus, the story brought together Cheney's personal involvement, false claims about WMD and al Qaeda, and Dougie Feith's role, as well as portraying a range of current and former intelligence officials directly attacking the politicization of intelligence.</p><p>A <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A15019-2003Jun4" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">June 5 Pincus article</a>, which evidence submitted at the Libby trial makes clear was a big deal within OVP, expands the report on pressure from Cheney and Libby.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>Vice President Cheney and his most senior aide made multiple trips to the CIA over the past year to question analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al Qaeda, creating an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives, according to senior intelligence officials.</p><p>With Cheney taking the lead in the administration last August in advocating military action against Iraq by claiming it had weapons of mass destruction, the visits by the vice president and his chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, "sent signals, intended or otherwise, that a certain output was desired from here," one senior agency official said yesterday.</p></div></blockquote><p>It also focused on Feith's shop.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>In a signal of administration concern over the controversy, two senior Pentagon officials yesterday held a news conference to challenge allegations that they pressured the CIA or other agencies to slant intelligence for political reasons. "I know of no pressure," said Douglas J. Feith, undersecretary for policy. "I know of nobody who pressured anybody."</p><p>Feith said a special Pentagon office to analyze intelligence in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks did not necessarily focus on Iraq but came up with "some interesting observations about the linkages between Iraq and al Qaeda."</p><p>Officials in the intelligence community and on Capitol Hill, however, have described the office as an alternative source of intelligence analysis that helped the administration make its case that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat.</p></div></blockquote><p>On June 7, Pincus and Dana Priest <a href="http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0607-03.htm" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">reported</a> discrepancies between what analysts concluded and what Bush and Cheney said publicly.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>During the weeks last fall before critical votes in Congress and the United Nations on going to war in Iraq, senior administration officials, including President Bush, expressed certainty in public that Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, even though U.S. intelligence agencies were reporting they had no direct evidence that such weapons existed.</p><p>In an example of the tenor of the administration's statements at the time, the president said in the Rose Garden on Sept. 26 that "the Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons. The Iraqi regime is building the facilities necessary to make more biological and chemical weapons."</p><p>But a Defense Intelligence Agency report on chemical weapons, widely distributed to administration policymakers around the time of the president's speech, stated there was "no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing or stockpiling chemical weapons or whether Iraq has or will establish its chemical agent production facilities."</p></div></blockquote><p>On June 8, Condi Rice appeared on George Stephanopolous' show; he asked her extensively about the case for war and brought up Wilson's accusation from the Kristof article. The very next morning, <a href="http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2007/06/june_9_2003_the.html" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">after Bush told Libby</a> he was concerned about the Kristof allegations, Libby and John Hannah and Dick Cheney started madly collecting oppo research on Joe Wilson. By the end of the week, Cheney was trying to launder Valerie's identity through Robert Grenier's office so it would go into a Pincus article. So when, on June 12, Pincus reiterated Wilson's charges anew and not long after Spencer and friends repeated it, Cheney and Libby started leaking Plame's identity directly to Judy Miller.</p><p>When asked about these articles during his grand jury appearance a year later, incidentally, Scooter Libby still remembered them and their content.</p><p>The point is, it was never just Valerie and Joe. Dick Cheney outed Valerie Wilson because of a sense that a large number of intelligence professionals were about to reveal just how fraudulent the case for war had been, with a special focus on his own pressure of intelligence professionals and Dougie Feith's little intelligence shop. </p><p>And we know that Cheney's office was already trying to get out of that fix by torturing people. We don't know what was happening with Gitmo interrogations at this time, nor what questions the torturers were asking Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. But Duelfer's revelations make it clear that Cheney's office had already, frantically, been trying to torture some kind of validation for his claims for war out of boh Iraqi and al Qaeda detainees.</p><p><strong>Wilson's recent comments tying everything together</strong></p><p>Which brings us to a piece Joe Wilson wrote several weeks ago, after Jonathan Landay <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/66622.html" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">reported</a>that Cheney and Rummy had ordered torture to find ties between Iraq and al Qaeda. Wilson<a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-04-26/freedom-of-disinformation/full/" style="color: rgb(15, 102, 145); text-decoration: none; ">alluded</a> to that report.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>We have also learned that a principal reason for having tortured senior al Qaeda detainees was not, in fact, to defend the Homeland, but rather to build the case for war with Iraq based on alleged ties between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Despite literally hundreds of waterboarding sessions, there was no evidence developed that such a link existed. But that did not stop Cheney. He and others in the Bush administration simply asserted a link even though they knew one did not exist.</p></div></blockquote><p>And then tied all of these things together.</p><blockquote style="font-style: italic; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqo.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; margin-left: 2em; color: rgb(102, 81, 59); background-position: 0% 0%; "><div class="wbq" style="padding-top: 3px; padding-right: 30px; padding-bottom: 2px; padding-left: 30px; background-image: url(http://static1.firedoglake.com/template/emptywheel/images/bqc.gif); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; background-position: 100% 100%; "><p>The disinformation campaign to manipulate public opinion in favor of the invasion, the torture program, and the illegal exposure of a clandestine CIA agent—my wife, Valerie Plame Wilson—were linked events. In their desperate effort to gather material to whip up public support, Cheney and others resorted to torture, well known in the intelligence craft to elicit inherently unreliable information. Cheney & Co. then pressured the CIA to put its stamp of approval on a series of falsehoods—26 of which were inserted into Secretary of State Colin Powell’s speech before the United Nations Security Council. At the same time, Cheney was furiously attempting to suppress the true information that Saddam Hussein was not seeking yellowcake uranium in Niger. After I published the facts in an article in The New York Times in July 2003, Cheney tried to punish me and discredit the truth by directing the outing of a CIA operative who happened to be my wife.</p></div></blockquote><p>Now, as I said, I still remain skeptical that it's all as neat as this. It may well be that Joe is pulling all these threads together because Dick Cheney is a secretive power hungry asshole to everyone, and the renewed focus on Cheney gives the Wilsons another opportunity to hit back at Cheney for outing Valerie.</p><p>But I'm struck by two things: the insistence on Pelosi's and Graham's part that the NIE lies have ties to the torture briefings. And the likelihood that Dick Cheney's guy in Iraq, Harold Rhode, may have suggested waterboarding an Iraqi to shore up the case for war. </p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></span></span></p><p><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">We have never been reluctant to link Plame, the Iraq War and Torture. Seemed obvious to us. Maybe emptywheel, whom we adore, is just younger than us old codgers who know the players, oh too well.</span></span></span></p></div></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></span></span></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)<br /><br /><br />The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-41969480374333850872009-05-17T00:20:00.004+04:002009-05-17T00:33:43.077+04:00Karl Rove Thinks Someone Is Lying<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Other than himself, ofcourse.</span></span></div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: collapse; font-family: Verdana; font-size: 13px; "><span class="submitted" style="color: rgb(85, 85, 85); font-size: 0.8em; ">Submitted by christine on Fri, 05/15/2009 - 11:37am.</span> <span class="taxonomy" style="color: rgb(153, 153, 153); font-size: 0.8em; padding-top: 1.5em; padding-right: 1.5em; padding-bottom: 1.5em; padding-left: 1.5em; "><ul class="links inline" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 255); margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; display: inline; "><li class="first last taxonomy_term_4" style="display: inline; list-style-type: none; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0.5em; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0.5em; "><a href="http://blog.buzzflash.com/alerts" rel="tag" title="" class="taxonomy_term_4" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(0, 0, 255); font-weight: bold; ">Alerts</a></li></ul></span><div class="content" style="line-height: 1.4; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0.5em; margin-left: 0px; "><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">A BUZZFLASH NEWS ALERT<br />by Christine Bowman</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">As President </span><a target="_blank" href="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/architect/rove/cron.html" style="text-decoration: none; color: rgb(0, 0, 255); "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">George W. Bush's primary political mentor as well as a key policy advisor,</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"> Karl Rove was smack dab in the middle of explosive issues like the Valerie Plame outing and the scandal concerning the firings of nine US attorneys, known as "Prosecutorgate." Patrick Fitzgerald, who prosecuted the Plame case and won conviction of Vice President Cheney's right-hand man Scooter Libby, interviewed Rove five times but ultimately opted not to file charges against him.</span></p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; "><img src="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/media/ALeqM5iA2B3tW3M-szn8Rpv0E1zWmDes-w" alt="Karl Rove May 15, 2009" hspace="6" width="231" height="182" align="right" style="border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /></p><p style="text-align: left; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">Now another independent prosecutor, Nora R. Dannehy, is firing her questions at Rove. After a Department of Justice (DOJ) internal investigation came up short due to lack of subpoena power, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey gave Dannehy the job and the subpoena power to investigate the Alberto Gonzales DOJ's firing of US attorneys.</p><p style="text-align: right; margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; "><sup><i>(AP Photo/Lauren Victoria Burke)</i></sup></p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">In Prosecutorgate, the suspicion is that supposedly impartial US attorneys may have been pressured by their political higher ups to go after Democrats but go easy on Republicans in investigating possible corruption on the eve of the 2006 elections. After all, what better way to sway voters than to fill the news hour with a rash of unproven allegations against Democrats nationwide? Were US attorneys who did not go along, precipitously let go?</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">U.S. attorneys are political appointees who serve at the pleasure of the president, but they cannot be fired for "improper reasons" such as resisting White House or congressional pressure to pursue specific cases. Since Rove was Bush's top political strategist and a White House honcho, he would logically be a focus of the inquiry. Bush himself called Rove "the architect" when publically thanking him for his 2004 electoral win.</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">Rove's sworn testimony today given at his lawyer's offices, which appeared to last about four hours, will not be made public, but Washington Post reporter Carrie Johnson answered many questions about the case in <a target="_blank" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/05/14/DI2009051403253.html" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 255); ">an excellent online discussion posted earlier in the day.</a> Her <a target="_blank" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/14/AR2009051402816.html" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 255); ">overview of the case</a>, also carried in the Post, says Dannehy's job is to "examine whether former Justice Department and White House officials lied or obstructed justice in connection with the dismissal of federal prosecutors in 2006."</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">Some points the online discussion brought out include:</p><ul><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">The biggest risk of criminal jeopardy may not be the prosecutor firings themselves, but rather making false statements about one's role in the process.</span></li><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Only about half of the 93 Bush era US attorneys voluntarily left their positions around the time Obama was elected.</span></li><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">Attorney General Eric Holder anticipates nominating a first batch of replacement US attorneys in June or July.</span></li><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">A separate investigation of the firing scandal is under way in the US House of Representatives, where House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, too, has subpoena power. The House committee could conceivably make public the transcripts of Rove's future testimony.</span></li><li><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(255, 0, 0);">The DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility is conducting an investigation into Alabama Governor Don Siegelman's accusations that his corruption conviction by a Bush-appointed US attorney was tainted. Those findings have not yet been publicly released.</span></li></ul><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">Rove is the quintessential political operative, spinmeister, and smooth operator. By now, he also is a very experienced testifier. But he did appear shaken and certainly <a href="http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/hearing-footsteps-rove-freaks-out" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 255); ">"freaked out" back in April</a> over the possibility of investigations or prosecution of Bush staffers when Obama passed off to AG Holder a decision as to whether to pursue prosecutions after release of the DOJ torture memos.</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">These days, Rove just keeps up a good offense as his best defense. He remains a highly paid GOP commentator and talking point crafter, writing a column for The Wall Street Journal and <a target="_blank" href="http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=Rove&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wv#q=Rove+fox+news&hl=en&emb=0&client=firefox-a" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 255); ">appearing regularly on Fox News</a>. It was on Sean Hannity's show that he let rip his view that holding Bush officials to account was "like colonels in mirrored sunglasses" in a banana republic "junta" threatening their overthrown predecessors.</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Just the final nail in the Rove is NUTZ (criminally insane) theory.</span></span></p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; ">He said that -- not BuzzFlash. In the same back-and-forth, Rove characterized alleged war crimes as "a policy disagreement" not meriting attention after the fact.</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">(Oops, there's another nail.)</span></span></p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; "><a target="_blank" href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124226863721018193.html" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 0, 255); ">Rove's column Friday</a> doesn't mention his command performance before a criminal prosecutor. Instead, it deflects Bush Administration responsibility for torture onto Democrat and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. "Someone important appears not to be telling the truth ...", Rove begins.</p><p style="margin-top: 0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.9em; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">(Yeah, we wonder who? Whosever it is should be put in stockades on the National Mall, don't you think, Mr. Rove? Being independents we don't give a damn with which party the liars affiliate, we just want justice, or as close as we, mere humans, can get to it. Something tells me, given your record, Mr. Rove, you are one of the biggest liars!) </span></span></p></div></span></div><div><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)<br /><br /><br />The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span></span></span><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0); font-size: 13px; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br /></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-10813110349294664372009-05-16T23:48:00.002+04:002009-05-17T00:05:22.297+04:00Anyone surprised By This?<div><span class="Apple-style-span" style=" ;font-family:'Times New Roman';"><div class="header" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 30px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; color:initial;"><div class="headermeta" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 133px; padding-top: 85px; position: relative; color:initial;"><div class="title" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 35px; font-family:'Times New Roman', Times, serif;color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:large;">Cheney's Role Deepens</span></span><br /></span></span></div><div class="author" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 28px; font-style: italic; font-family:'Times New Roman', Times, serif;color:initial;"><span style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-style: normal; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">by</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;"> Robert Windrem</span></span></div><div class="timestamp" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 11px; line-height: 18px; color: rgb(160, 160, 160); ">May 13, 2009 | 6:31pm</div></div></div><div class="print_content" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-top: 10px; width: 680px; color:initial;"><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; font-size:13px;color:initial;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color:initial;"><strong style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-weight: bold; color:initial;"><span style=" outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-size:11pt;color:initial;"><span class="article_img float_right" style="width: 174px; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; text-decoration: none; display: inline; float: right; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 23px; color:initial;"><img class="" width="174" alt="Dick Cheney" src="http://www.tdbimg.com/files/2009/05/13/img-bs-top---windrem-dick-cheney-torture_180849362188.jpg" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; " /><span class="photo-credit" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images</span></span></span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">Former NBC News investigative producer Robert Windrem reports that the vice president’s office suggested waterboarding an Iraqi prisoner who was suspected of knowing about a relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam.</span></span></strong></span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; "><strong style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-weight: bold; ">Robert Windrem, who covered terrorism for NBC, reports exclusively in The Daily Beast that:</strong></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; "><strong style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-weight: bold; ">*Two U.S. intelligence officers confirm that Vice President Cheney’s office suggested waterboarding an Iraqi prisoner, a former intelligence official for Saddam Hussein, who was suspected to have knowledge of a Saddam-al Qaeda connection.</strong></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; "><strong style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-weight: bold; ">*The former chief of the Iraq Survey Group, Charles Duelfer, in charge of interrogations, tells The Daily Beast that he considered the request reprehensible.</strong></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; "><strong style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-weight: bold; ">*Much of the information in the report of the 9/11 Commission was provided through more than 30 sessions of torture of detainees.</strong></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; ">At the end of April 2003, not long after the fall of Baghdad, U.S. forces captured an Iraqi who Bush White House officials suspected might provide information of a relationship between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein’s regime. Muhammed Khudayr al-Dulaymi was the head of the M-14 section of Mukhabarat, one of Saddam’s secret police organizations. His responsibilities included chemical weapons and contacts with terrorist groups.</p><p style="text-align: center; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; font-size:13px;color:initial;"><span class="PullQuote" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; display: block; border-top-width: 1px; border-top-style: dotted; border-top-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-top: 10px; padding-right: 40px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 40px; color: rgb(17, 17, 17); line-height: 20px; margin-bottom: 5px; font-family:'Times New Roman', Times, serif;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">Two senior U.S. intelligence officials at the time tell The Daily Beast that the suggestion to waterboard an Iraqi prisoner came from the Office of Vice President Cheney.</span></span></span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">“To those who wanted or suspected a relationship, he would have been a guy who would know, so [White House officials] had particular interest,” Charles Duelfer, head of the Iraqi Survey Group and the man in charge of interrogations of Iraqi officials, told me. So much so that the officials, according to Duelfer, inquired how the interrogation was proceeding.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">In his new book, </span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1586485571/thedaibea-20" target="_blank" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-decoration: underline; "><em style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">Hide and Seek: The Search for Truth in Iraq</span></em></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">, and in an interview with The Daily Beast, Duelfer says he heard from “some in Washington at very senior levels (not in the CIA),” who thought Khudayr’s interrogation had been “too gentle” and suggested another route, one that they believed has proven effective elsewhere. “They asked if enhanced measures, such as waterboarding, should be used,” Duelfer writes. “The executive authorities addressing those measures made clear that such techniques could legally be applied only to terrorism cases, and our debriefings were not as yet terrorism-related. The debriefings were just debriefings, even for this creature.”</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">Duelfer will not disclose who in Washington had proposed the use of waterboarding, saying only: “The language I can use is what has been cleared.” In fact, two senior U.S. intelligence officials at the time tell The Daily Beast that the suggestion to waterboard came from the Office of Vice President Cheney. Cheney, of course, has vehemently defended waterboarding and other harsh techniques, insisting they elicited valuable intelligence and saved lives. He has also asked that several memoranda be declassified to prove his case. (The Daily Beast placed a call to Cheney’s office and will post a response if we get one.)</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">Without admitting where the suggestion came from, Duelfer revealed that he considered it reprehensible and understood the rationale as political—and ultimately counterproductive to the overall mission of the Iraq Survey Group, which was assigned the mission of finding Saddam Hussein’s WMD after the invasion.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">“Everyone knew there would be more smiles in Washington if WMD stocks were found,” Duelfer said in the interview. “My only obligation was to find the truth. It would be interesting if there was WMD in May 2003, but what was more interesting to me was looking at the entire regime through the slice of WMD.”</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">But, Duelfer says, Khudayr in fact repeatedly denied knowing the location of WMD or links between Saddam’s regime and al Qaeda and was not subjected to any enhanced interrogation. Duelfer says the idea that he would have known of such links was “ludicrous".</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">This proposed use of enhanced interrogation techniques, or torture, in Iraq was not the only time these methods were actually used to derive information for a purpose other than the stated one—to derive intelligence about imminent threats to the United States following the 9/11 attacks.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">An </span><a href="http://deepbackground.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/30/624314.aspx" target="_blank" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); text-decoration: underline; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">extensive analysis</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;"> I conducted as a reporter for NBC News of the 9/11 Commission’s Final Report and its monograph on terrorist travel showed that much of what was reported about the planning and execution of the terror attacks on New York and Washington was based on the CIA's interrogations of high-ranking al Qaeda operatives who had been subjected to "enhanced interrogation techniques."</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">More than one-quarter of all footnotes in the 9/11 Report refer to CIA interrogations of al Qaeda operatives subjected to the now-controversial interrogation techniques. In fact, information derived from the interrogations was central to the 9/11 Report’s most critical chapters, those on the planning and execution of the attacks.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">The NBC analysis also showed—and agency and commission staffers concur—there was a separate, second round of interrogations in early 2004, specifically conducted to answer new questions from the 9/11 Commission after its lawyers had been left unsatisfied by the agency’s internal interrogation reports.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">Human-rights advocates, including Karen Greenberg of New York University Law School’s Center for Law and Security and Michael Ratner of the Center for Constitutional Rights, have said that, at the least, the 9/11 Commission should have been more suspect of the information derived under such pressure.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">Commission executive director Philip Zelikow (later counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice) admitted, "We were not aware, but we guessed, that things like that were going on. We were wary…we tried to find different sources to enhance our credibility." (Zelikow testified before the Senate on Wednesday, May 13, that he had argued in a 2005 memo that some of the tactics used on suspected terrorists violated the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.)</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">A former senior U.S. intelligence official told me the Commission never expressed any concerns about techniques and even pushed for a second round of interrogations in early 2004, as the Commission was finishing up its work. The second round of interrogations sought by the Commission involved more than 30 separate interrogation sessions.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">"Remember," the intelligence official said, "the Commission had access to the intelligence reports that came out of the interrogation. This didn't satisfy them. They demanded direct personal access to the detainees and the administration told them to go pound sand.”</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">"As a compromise, they were allowed to let us know what questions they would have liked to ask the detainees. At appropriate times in the interrogation cycle, agency questioners would go back and re-interview the detainees. Many of [those] questions were variants or follow-ups to stuff previously asked."</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">At least four operatives whose interrogation figured in the 9/11 Commission Report have claimed that they told interrogators critical information as a way to stop being "tortured." Those claims came during their hearings in the spring of 2007 at the U.S. military facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">For Duelfer, an experienced interrogator, the details now being laid out in CIA and White House memoranda and in congressional hearings cannot be justified. While admitting that the interrogators faced enormous pressure in 2002 and 2003, he said he had problems with the overall strategy.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline- margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; color:initial;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size:medium;">“Interrogation is about two humans who are face to face, sweat to sweat. Is your hand going to hit them?” he notes. “That’s a relationship that becomes very deep. If you are going to reach someone at an intellectual or emotive level, it’s hard to see how you can do that and still be the person who accosts that person. I don’t know how to do that.”</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; padding-bottom: 15px; "><em style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Robert Windrem is a Senior Reserach Fellow at the NYU Center on Law and Security. For three decades, he worked as a producer for NBC News. During that time, he focused on issues of international security, strategic policy, intelligence and terrorism. He is the winner of more than 40 national journalism awards for his work in print, television, and online journalism, including a Columbia-duPont Award, mostly for his work on international security issues.</em></p></div></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-56291384939367921702009-05-16T23:45:00.002+04:002009-05-16T23:48:46.648+04:00As Pelosi Accuses The CIA of Lying.....<div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">...things heat up regarding torture</span></span></div><div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Arial; "><div id="content_wrap" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; position: relative; z-index: 60; "><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-bottom: 15px; ">Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) opened a hearing on the Bush administration’s torture policy quoting Tallyrand: “The greatest danger in times of crisis comes from the zeal of those who are inexperienced.” Whitehouse promised to separate the “truth” from its “bodyguard of lies.” In doing so, the former federal prosecutor brought the shadowy world of intelligence into Room 226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Former star FBI interrogator Ali Soufan, widely described as the bureau’s best and most effective interrogator working in the Arabic language, testified off-camera and behind a wooden partition. Concerned for his and his family’s security, he made the unusual demand a part of his agreement to appear and testify.</p><p style="text-align: center; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-bottom: 15px; "><span class="PullQuote" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-left: 0px; display: block; border-top-width: 1px; border-top-style: dotted; border-top-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-top: 10px; padding-right: 40px; padding-bottom: 10px; padding-left: 40px; font-family: 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; font-size: 18px; color: rgb(17, 17, 17); line-height: 20px; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 5px; ">The effort to destroy the Zelikow memo is not just evidence of standard record-keeping practice; it may well spring from recognition that the memo might be used as evidence that the Bush administration was engaged in criminality.</span></p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-bottom: 15px; ">The hearing produced two significant developments as well as a great deal of political rhetoric. Soufan’s testimony focused on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah. Throughout the history of the torture debate, the Bush administration has cited this as a triumph of its techniques. Sen. Whitehouse read Bush’s September 6, 2006, White House statement making one of these claims. Soufan, who was personally present through the process, called the Bush claims a “half-truth,” accurate as to the circumstances of Abu Zubaydah’s capture and detention, but not as to the claimed successes using highly coercive techniques. One of the Justice Department’s torture memos (from May 2005) contained a similar claim that actionable intelligence was obtained “once enhanced techniques were employed.” Soufan termed this a lie. He also noted that successful interrogations of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Jose Padilla, which gained useful intelligence, occurred before the introduction of the Bush program and therefore couldn’t be claimed as success stories for it. In his remarks, Soufan sharply repudiated the harsh techniques he observed. “These techniques... are ineffective, slow, and unreliable and, as a result, harmful to our efforts to defeat al Qaeda," he said. He also downplayed claims that there was a dispute between the FBI and CIA about the use of the Bush techniques. CIA interrogators agreed with his assessment, he noted.</p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-bottom: 15px; ">Philip Zelikow, a lawyer and history professor who had served as a counselor to Condoleezza Rice at the State Department, testified that the Justice Department had thwarted legislation sponsored by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) that prohibited cruel, inhuman, and degrading techniques on detainees. He noted that McCain and other sponsors understood the legislation as a prohibition on waterboarding and other harsh techniques, but through legal sleight of hand, Steven Bradbury, then head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had nevertheless found that the legislation was ineffective to make the expected changes. Zelikow recorded his opposition to this view in his own memo, which he disseminated widely within the Bush administration. It was made clear to him that his memo was not appreciated, and, moreover, an effort was made to collect and destroy copies of the memo. One copy has now been identified in the records of the State Department, he noted. Its declassification and release are anticipated shortly.</p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-bottom: 15px; ">The story surrounding the efforts to corral and destroy the Zelikow memo is more than a curious vignette. Lawyers studying the issue of criminal liability of the memo writers are focused on evidence of <em style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">mens rea</em>—a state of mind that reflects recognition of criminal wrongdoing. The effort to destroy the memo is not just evidence of standard record-keeping practice; it may well spring from recognition that the memo might be used as evidence that the Bush administration was engaged in criminality.</p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-bottom: 15px; ">Republicans called two legal experts to offer opinions but no fact witnesses. This raised the question of whether they have a CIA interrogator who is ready or willing to make a case to support Cheney’s claims about the efficacy of torture.</p><p style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-left: 0px; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-bottom: 15px; "></p></div><div style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; "><div class="hr" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; clear: both; display: block; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: auto; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: auto; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; height: 1px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; background-image: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: rgb(229, 229, 229); border-left-width: 1px; border-left-style: solid; border-left-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); border-right-width: 1px; border-right-style: solid; border-right-color: rgb(0, 0, 0); width: 488px; background-position: initial initial; "></div><div class="gap10" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; height: 10px; overflow-x: hidden; overflow-y: hidden; clear: both; "></div><a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-14/bushies-break-ranks-on-torture/full/" class="txt_viewassinglepage txt" style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; text-decoration: none; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; color: rgb(255, 255, 255); cursor: pointer; background-repeat: no-repeat; width: 91px; height: 11px; display: inline; float: left; background-image: url(http://www.tdbimg.com/image/txt_viewassinglepage.gif?v=8.18); background-position: 50% 0%; "><div class="txt_viewassinglepage txt" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; cursor: pointer; background-repeat: no-repeat; width: 91px; height: 11px; display: inline; float: left; background-image: url(http://www.tdbimg.com/image/txt_viewassinglepage.gif?v=8.18); background-position: 50% 0%; "></div></a><div class="pagination" id="article_pagination" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; word-spacing: -4px; text-align: center; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px; padding-top: 7px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 7px; padding-left: 0px; "><div class="pagination" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; word-spacing: -4px; text-align: center; font-size: 14px; line-height: 14px; padding-top: 7px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 7px; padding-left: 0px; "><span class="page-label" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; font-weight: normal; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 13px; ">Page: </span><div class="a current" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 3px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 3px; display: inline; color: rgb(255, 0, 0); ">1</div><a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-14/bushies-break-ranks-on-torture/2/" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; text-decoration: none; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 3px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 3px; ">2</a> <a href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-05-14/bushies-break-ranks-on-torture/2/" class="arrow_right" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; text-decoration: none; outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 3px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 3px; "><img src="http://www.tdbimg.com/image/arrow_right.gif?v=8.30" alt="Right" width="14" height="11" border="0" class="arrow" style="outline-style: none; outline-width: initial; outline-color: initial; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; border-top-width: 0px; border-right-width: 0px; border-bottom-width: 0px; border-left-width: 0px; border-style: initial; border-color: initial; display: inline; " /></a></div></div></div></span></div><div><br /></div><div><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)<br /><br /><br />The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-53328111957651436352009-05-16T23:34:00.002+04:002009-05-16T23:39:38.957+04:00We Say," Let It All Hang Out!<div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">At this point in our history, it is time for a "fearless, moral inventory." Our Democracy, any fiuture respect for our nation depends on it.</span></span></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(64, 64, 64); font-family: arial; font-size: 12px; line-height: 17px; "><table width="100%"><tbody><tr><td><h1 class="diaryTitle"><a href="http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=CD79430329BC08C7CEB1148230D39A87?diaryId=2767" class="diaryTitle"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: medium;">If We're Going to Reveal More Memos. . . .</span></a></h1><h2 class="author"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">by: </span><a href="http://www.vetvoice.com/userDiary.do;jsessionid=CD79430329BC08C7CEB1148230D39A87?personId=797" class="author"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">MajorMatthew</span></a></h2><h3 class="diaryTimestamp"><i>Fri May 15, 2009 at 15:06:22 PM EDT</i></h3><br /></td></tr><tr><td><i>( - promoted by Brandon Friedman</i>)<br /><br />Former VP Dick Cheney has requested the release of additional memos showing that torture and abuse saved American lives by preventing terrorist attacks. If the Obama Administration decides to release these memos, then I suggest they also release statistics from Iraq showing the number of foreign fighters that were recruited because of our policy of torture and abuse. It was tracked. I know because I saw the slides and because I heard captured foreign fighters state this day in and day out. The government can also release the statistics that show that 90% of suicide bombers in Iraq were these same foreign fighters. These foreign fighters killed hundreds, if not thousands, of American soldiers. <p>After these revelations, Americans can judge whether or not a policy of torture and abuse kept us safe. Unfortunately, we'll never be able to evaluate the damage that was done to past or future interrogations. As I experienced firsthand, detainees were less likely to cooperate when they viewed us as hypocrites. We can't establish the trust that is required to convince a detainee to cooperate unless we live up to the principles that we preach. </p><p>I had one detainee in Iraq, a previous Al Qaida fighter, who provided me with all the information he knew willingly without me having to run an interrogation approach. He told me that Al Qaida had accused him of being a mole and tortured him before we rescued him. He then proceeded to say that the reason he was going to cooperate was because we didn't torture him and because of that, he knew everything that he'd been told about us by Al Qaida was wrong.</p><p>Before 9/11, the protection of American soldiers from terrorist attacks was a priority for our country. Consider our responses to the Beirut Bombing, Khobar Towers, and the USS Cole. When we talk about keeping Americans safe from terrorist attacks, we need to include all Americans, especially those that serve in uniform.</p></td></tr><tr><td class="theFlip"><a href="http://www.vetvoice.com/userDiary.do;jsessionid=CD79430329BC08C7CEB1148230D39A87?personId=797">MajorMatthew</a> :: <a href="http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do;jsessionid=CD79430329BC08C7CEB1148230D39A87?diaryId=2767">If We're Going to Reveal More Memos. . . .</a></td></tr></tbody></table></span></div><div><br /></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)<br /><br /><br />The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-39155283183252368322009-05-16T23:26:00.002+04:002009-05-16T23:31:35.978+04:00The Only Way Out Of The Economic Crisis<div><br /></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(48, 48, 48); font-family: -webkit-sans-serif; font-size: 13px; "><div class="news-submitted" style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-size: 85%; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(48, 48, 48); font-size: 13px; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;">According to Joseph M. Schwartz, professor of political science at Temple University and a Vice-Chair of Democratic Socialists of America: "In the end, restoring a stable global economic system will require raising the floor under global living standards and working conditions and creating global regulatory institutions that insure that investment and trade benefit all working people. The era of deregulatory free-market mania is crashing down upon us. We must revive the capacity of democratic governments to regulate the economy to serve people’s needs rather than the speculative desires of corporate elites to recover from the current global economic nightmare."</span></span><br /></div><div class="news-tags" style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102); font-size: 90%; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; "><br /></div></span></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">(</span><span class="Apple-style-span" style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-style: italic;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: bold;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)<br /><br /><br />The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span></span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-53870077189282255392009-05-08T00:32:00.000+04:002009-05-08T00:32:49.548+04:00In Congress We Trust…Not..... Neither Can We Trust The ACNM<span style="font-size: 14pt;"><br />
</span><div style="color: red;"></div><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><o:p></o:p></span></span></span> <div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="color: red;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">I have been known to quote long-dead men in my past writings. Whether eloquently expressed thoughts by our founding fathers, or those artfully expressed by ancient Greek thinkers, these quotes have always done a better job starting or ending my thoughts - that tend to be expressed in long winding sentences. For this piece I am going to break with tradition and start with an appropriate quote from a living current senator, John Kerry: “<i>It’s a sad day when you have members of congress who are literally criminals go undisciplined by their colleagues. No wonder people look at <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Washington</st1:place></st1:state> and know this city is broken.</i>”</span></span></span><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><o:p></o:p></span></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">The people do indeed look at <st1:state w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Washington</st1:place></st1:state> and know that this city is ‘badly’ broken, Senator Kerry. The public confidence in our Congress has been declining drastically. Recent poll <a href="http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0708/p03s04-uspo.html.com/">results</a> <span> </span>highlight how the American people’s trust in their congress has hit rock bottom. A survey of progressive blogs easily confirms the rage rightfully directed at our congress for abdicating its role of oversight and accountability. Activists scream about promised hearings that never took place - without explanation. They express outrage when investigations are dropped without any justification. And they genuinely wonder out loud why, especially after they helped secure a major victory for the Democrats. The same Democrats who had for years pointed fingers at their big bad Republican majority colleagues as the main impediment preventing them from fulfilling what was expected of them.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><span style="color: red;">The recent stunning but not unexpected </span><a href="http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page1.html" style="color: red;">revelations </a><span style="color: red;">regarding Jane Harman by the Congressional Quarterly provide us with a little glimpse into one of the main reasons behind the steady decline in congress’s integrity. But the story is almost dead - ready to bite the dust, thanks to our mainstream media’s insistence on burying ‘real’ issues or stories that delve deep into the causes of our nation’s continuous downward slide. In this particular case, the ‘thank you’ should also be extended to certain blogosphere propagandists who, blinded by their partisanship, myopic in their assessments, and ignorant in their knowledge of the inner workings of our late congress and intelligence agencies, helped in the post-burial cremation of this case.</span></b></span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">Ironically but understandably, the Harman case has become one of rare unequivocal bipartisanship, when no one from either side of the partisan isle utters a word. How many House or Senate Republicans have you heard screaming, or even better, calling for an investigation? <span style="color: red;">The right wing remains silent. Some may have their hand, directly or indirectly, in the same AIPAC cookie jar. Others may still feel the heavy baggage of their own party’s tainted colleagues; after all, they have had their share of Abramoffs, Hasterts and the like, silently lurking in the background, albeit dimmer every day. Some on the left, after an initial silence that easily could have been mistaken for shock, are jumping from one foot to the other, like a cat on a hot tin roof, making one excuse after another; playing the ‘victims of Executive Branch eavesdropping’ card, the same very ‘evil doing’ they happened to support vehemently. </span>Some have been dialing their trusted guardian angels within the <span style="color: black;">mainstream media</span> and certain fairly visible alternative outlets. They need no longer worry, since these guardian angels seem to have blacked out the story, and have done so without much arm twisting. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 150%;"><b>Hastert Redux</b><o:p></o:p></span></i></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">I<span style="color: red;"> am going to rewind and take you back to September 2005, when Vanity Fair published an </span><a href="http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article9774.htm" style="color: red;">article</a><span style="color: red;">, which in addition to my case and the plight of National Security Whistleblowers, exposed the dark side of the then Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, and the corroborated allegations of his illegal activities involving foreign agents and interests. </span></span><span lang="EN" style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="body1" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="body1" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 150%;">Vanity Fair printed the story only after they made certain they were on sure footing in the face of any possible libel by lining up more than five credible sources, and after triple pit bull style fact-checking. They were vindicated; Hastert did not dare go after them, nor did he ever issue any true denial. Moreover, further vindication occurred only a month ago. On <st1:date day="10" ls="trans" month="4" w:st="on" year="2009">April 10, 2009</st1:date>, T<span style="color: red;">he Hill </span><a href="http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/hastert-contracted-to-lobby-for-turkey-2009-04-10.html" style="color: red;">reported</a><span style="color: red;"> that the Former Speaker of the House was contracted to lobby for </span><st1:place style="color: red;" w:st="on"><st1:country-region w:st="on">Turkey</st1:country-region></st1:place><span style="color: red;">. The </span><span class="body"><span style="color: black;"><span style="color: red;">Justice Department record on this deal indicates that Hastert will now be “principally involved” on a $35,000-a-month contract providing representation for Turkish interests.</span> That seems to be the current arrangement for those serving foreign interests while on the job in congress - to be paid at a later date, collecting on their IOU’s when they secure their positions with ‘the foreign lobby.’<o:p></o:p></span></span></span></div><div class="body1" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="body1" style="line-height: 150%;"><span class="body"><span style="color: black; font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 150%;">In a recent <a href="http://amconmag.com/article/2009/may/04/00016/">article</a><b> </b>for the American Conservative Magazine, Philip Giraldi, Former CIA Officer stationed in <st1:country-region w:st="on">Turkey</st1:country-region>, made the following point:</span></span><span class="body" style="color: red;"><i><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 150%;">” <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Edmonds</st1:place></st1:city>’s claims have never been pursued, presumably because there are so many skeletons in both parties’ closets. She has been served with a state-secrets gag order to make sure that what she knows is never revealed, a restriction that the new regime in <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:state w:st="on">Washington</st1:state></st1:place> has not lifted.” <span> </span></span></i><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 150%;">He hits the nail on the head:</span><i><span style="font-family: Arial; font-size: 9pt; line-height: 150%;">” In Hastert’s case, it certainly should be a matter of public concern that a senior elected representative who may have received money from a foreign country is now officially lobbying on its behalf. How many other congressmen might have similar relationships with foreign countries and lobbying groups, providing them with golden parachutes for their retirement?”</span></i></span><b><o:p></o:p></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><b style="color: red;">The congress went mum on my case after the Vanity Fair story, with, of course, the mainstream media making it very easy for them. </b>They turned bipartisan in not pursuing the case, just as with the Harman case, and similarly, the mainstream media happily let it disappear. At the time I was not aware that during the publication of the Hastert story, Jane Harman’s AIPAC case was already brewing in the background. Moreover, one of the very few people in congress who was notified about Harman was none other than Hastert, the man himself. The same Hastert, who in addition to being one of several officials targeted by the FBI counterintelligence and counterespionage investigations, was also known to be directly involved in several other high profile scandals: from his intimate involvement in the Abramoff <a href="http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/05/federal_officia.html">scandal</a></span><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 150%;">,</span><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"> to the Representative William Jefferson <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/23/jefferson/index.html">scandal </a>; from his ‘Land Deal’ <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/22/politics/main1740900.shtml">scandal</a> - where he cashed in millions off his position while “serving”, to the 2006 House Page <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/04/washington/04cnd-hastert.html?_r=2&hp&ex=1160020800&en=a3fbb0550d8f4163&ei=5094&partner=homepage">scandal</a>.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><b><i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 150%;">All for One, One for All <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><b><i><span style="font-size: 10pt; line-height: 150%;"><o:p> </o:p></span></i></b><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><b><span style="color: red;">How does it work? </span></b>How do these people escape accountability, the consequences? Are we talking about the possible use of blackmail by the Executive Branch against congressional representatives, as if <st1:city w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Hoover</st1:place></st1:city>’s days were never over? Cases such as NSA illegal eavesdropping come to mind, when congressional members were briefed long before it became public, yet none took any action or even uttered a word; members of both parties.<span> </span>Or is it more likely to be a case of secondhand blackmail, where members of congress keep tabs on each other? Or, is it a combination of the above? Regardless, we see this ‘one for all, all for one’ kind of solidarity in congress when it comes to criminal conduct and scandals such as those of Hastert and Harman. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: red;">Although at an initial glance, based on the wiretapping angle, the Harman case may appear to involve blackmailing, or a milder version, exploitation, of congress by the Executive Branch, deeper analysis would suggest even further implications, where congressional members themselves use the incriminating information against each other to prevent pursuit or investigation of cases that they may be directly or indirectly involved in. Let me give you an example based on the Hastert case mentioned earlier:</span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">In 2004 and 2005 I had several meetings with Representative Henry Waxman’s investigative and legal staff. Two of these meetings took place inside a <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/encyclopedia_term/0,2542,t=SCIF&i=55745,00.asp">SCIF</a>, where details and classified information pertaining to my case and those involved could be discussed. I was told, and at the time I believed it to be the case, that the Republican majority was preventing further action - such as holding a public hearing. <span style="color: red;">Once the Democrats took over in 2006, that barrier was removed, or so I thought</span>. </span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><b><span style="color: red;">In March 2007, I was contacted by one of Representative Waxman’s staff people who felt responsible and conscientious enough to at least let me know that there would never be a hearing into my case by their office, or for that matter, any Democratic office in the House. Based on his/her account, in February 2007 Waxman’s office was preparing the necessary ingredients for their promised hearing, but in mid March the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, called Waxman into a meeting on the case, and after Waxman came out of that twenty minute meeting, he told his staff ‘we are no longer involved in Edmonds’ case.’ And so they became ‘uninvolved.’ </span></b><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><b><span style="color: red;">What was discussed during that meeting?</span></b> The facts regarding the <a href="http://www.nswbc.org/Press%20Releases/PressRelease-March5-07.htm">FBI's pursuit </a><span> </span>of Hastert and certain other representatives were bound to come out in any congressional hearing into my case. <span style="color: red;">Now we know that Hastert and Pelosi were both informed of Harman’s role in a related case involving counterespionage investigation of AIPAC. Is it possible that Pelosi asked Waxman to lay off my case in order to protect a few of their own in an equally scandalous case</span>? Was there a deal made between the Democratic and Republican leaders in the House to keep this and other related scandals hushed? Will we ever know the answer to these questions? Most likely not, considering the current state of our mainstream media. And the victims remain the same: The American people who have entrusted the role of ensuring oversight and accountability with their congress. This kind of infestation touches everyone in congress; one need not have a skeleton of his own to get sucked into the swamp of those infested. Does Waxman have to be a sinner to take part in the sin committed by the Hasterts and Harmans of congress? Certainly not. On the other hand, he and others like him will abide by the un-pledged oath of ‘solidarity with your party members’ and ‘loyalty to your dear colleagues.’ <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: black; font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="color: red;">Back to the enablers:</span></b></span><span><span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="color: red;"> </span></b></span> </span>How can we explain the continued blackout by the mainstream media, and/or, logic-less defenses of the Harmans and Hasterts alike by the apologist spinners - some of whom pass as the ‘alternative’ media? Some are committing what they rightfully accused the previous administration and their pawns of doing: cherry picking the facts, then, spin, spin, and spin until the real issue becomes blurry and unrecognizable. <span style="color: red;">The conspiracy angle aimed at the timing; Porter Goss’ possible beef with Jane Harman; accusing the truth divulgers, CQ sources, of being ‘conspirators’ with ulterior motives; portraying Harman as an outspoken vigilante on torture. And if those sound too lame to swallow, they throw in a few evil names from the foggy past of Dusty the Foggo man! If the issue and its implications weren’t so serious, these spins of reality would certainly make a Pulitzer worthy satire.</span><o:p style="color: red;"></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="color: red; line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><span style="color: red;">Let’s take the issue of timing. First of all, the story was </span><a href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1549069,00.html" style="color: red;">reported</a><span style="color: red;">, albeit not comprehensively, by Time Magazine years ago. It took a tenacious journalist, more importantly a journalist that could have been trusted by the Intel sources to give it real coverage. It is also possible that the sources for the Harman case got fed up and disillusioned by the absence of a real investigation and decided to ‘really’ talk. </span>After all, the <b>AIPAC</b> court case was dropped by the Justice Department’s prosecutors within two weeks of the Harman revelations. <b style="color: red;">Same could be said about the Hastert story.</b> At the time, many asked why the story was not told during the earlier stages of my case. It took three years for me and other FBI and DOJ sources to exhaust all channels; congressional inquiry, IG investigation, and the courts. Those who initially were not willing to come forward and corroborate the details opened up to the Vanity Fair journalist, David Rose, in 2005. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b><span style="color: red;">Now let’s look at the ‘blackmail’ and ‘Goss’ Plot’ angles.</span></b></span> Of course the ‘blackmail’ scenario is possible; in fact, highly possible. We all can picture one of the President’s men in the White House pulling an opposing congressional member aside and whispering ‘if I were you, congressman, I’d stop pushing. I understand, as we speak, my Justice Department is looking into certain activities you’ve been engaged in….’<b><span style="color: red;"> We all can imagine, easily, a head of the Justice Department, having a ‘discreet’ meeting with a representative who’s been pushing for a certain investigation of certain department officials for criminal deeds, and saying, ‘dear congresswoman, we are aware of your role in a certain scandal, and are still pondering whether we should turn this into a direct investigation of you and appoint a special prosecutor…’ </span></b>But, let’s not forget, the misuse of incriminating information to blackmail does not make the practitioner of the wrong deed a victim, nor does it make the wrong or criminal deed less wrong. Instead of spinning the story, taking away attention from the facts in hand, and making Harman a victim, we must focus on this case, on Harman, as an example of a very serious disease that has infected our congress for way too long. <span style="color: red;">Those who have been entrusted with the oversight and accountability of our government cannot do so if they are vulnerable to such blackmails from the very same people they are overseeing…Period. Those who have been elected to represent the people and their interests cannot pursue their own greed and ambitions by engaging in criminal or unethical activities against the interests of the same people they’ve sworn to represent, and be given a pass.</span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;"><b><span style="color: red;">As for far-reaching ties such as Harman’s stand on torture, or specific beef with Porter Goss, or wild shooting from the hip by bringing up mafia-like characters such as Dusty Foggo; please don’t make us laugh! Are we talking about the same Hawkish Pro Secrecy Jane Harman here?! Harman’s staunch support of NSA Wiretapping of Americans, the FISA Amendment of 2008, the Patriot ACT, the war with Iraq, and many other activities on the Civil Liberties’ </span></b>No No-list, is known by everyone. But, apparently not by the authors of these recent spins! <span style="color: red;">And, let’s not forget to add her long-term cozy relationship with AIPAC, and the large donations she’s received from various AIPAC-related pro Israeli PACs. To these certain ‘wannabe’ journalists driven by far from pure agenda(s), shame on you; as for honor-worthy vigilant activists out there: watch out for these impostors with their newly gained popularity among those tainted in Washington, and take a hard look at whose </span><a href="http://blogs.jta.org/politics/article/2009/04/24/1004622/why-did-porter-goss-finger-jane-harman" style="color: red;">agendas</a><span style="color: red;"> they are a mouthpiece for. </span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">Despite a certain degree of exposure cases such as Harman and Hastert, involving corruption of public officials, seem to meet the same dead-end, literally dead. Powerful foreign entities’ criminal conduct against our national interest is given a pass as was recently proven by the AIPAC case. <span style="color: red;">The absence of real investigative journalism and the pattern of blackout by our mainstream media are known universally and seem to have been accepted as a fact of life.</span> Pursuit of cases such as mine via cosmetically available channels has been and continues to be proven futile for whistleblowers. Then, you may want to ask, why in the world am I writing this piece? Because more and more people, although not nearly enough, are coming to the realization that our system is rotten at it’s core; that in many cases we have been trying to deal with the symptoms rather than the cause.<span style="color: red;"> I, like many others, believed that changing the congressional majority in 2006 was going to bring about some of the needed changes; the pursuit of accountability being one. We were proven wrong. In 2008, many genuinely bought in to the promise of change, and thus far, they’ve been let down. These experiences are disheartening, surely, but they are also eye-opening. I do see many vigilant activists who continue the fight, and as long as that’s the case, there is hope. </span>More people realize that real change will require not replacing one or two or three, but many more. More people are coming to understand that the road to achieving government of the people passes through a congress, but not the one currently occupied by the many crusty charlatans who represent only self-interest - achieved by representing the interests of those other than the majority of the people of this nation. And so I write.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"><span style="font-size: 10pt; font-weight: normal; line-height: 150%;">Here I go again, rather than ending this in a long paragraph or two, I will let another long-gone man do it shortly and effectively <span style="font-size: large;"><b style="color: red;">“<i>If we have Senators and Congressmen there that can't protect themselves against the evil temptations of lobbyists, we don't need to change our lobbies, we need to change our representatives.</i>”--- Will Rogers</b></span><o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%;"></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; line-height: 150%;"># # # #</span></div><div class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: small;"><b><i><span style="font-size: 8pt; font-weight: normal;"><a href="http://nswbc.org/nswbc_staff.htm"><span>Sibel Edmonds</span></a> is the founder and director of National Security Whistleblowers Coalition (<a href="http://nswbc.org/"><span>NSWBC</span></a>). Ms. Edmonds worked as a language specialist for the FBI.<span> </span>During her work with the bureau, she discovered and reported serious acts of security breaches, cover-ups, and intentional blocking of intelligence that had national security implications. After she reported these acts to FBI management, she was retaliated against by the FBI and ultimately fired in March 2002. Since that time, court proceedings on her case have been blocked by the assertion of “State Secret Privilege”; the Congress of the <st1:country-region w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">United States</st1:place></st1:country-region> has been gagged and prevented from any discussion of her case through retroactive re-classification by the Department of Justice. Ms. Edmonds is fluent in Turkish, Farsi and Azerbaijani; and has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, and a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University. <st1:place w:st="on"><st1:placename w:st="on">PEN</st1:placename> <st1:placename w:st="on">American</st1:placename> <st1:placetype w:st="on">Center</st1:placetype></st1:place> awarded Ms. Edmonds the 2006 PEN/Newman's Own First Amendment Award. </span></i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-2501679891155873592009-05-08T00:01:00.000+04:002009-05-08T00:01:13.045+04:00My years as an Iraq war reporter<div class="float-right text-right position-relative margin-top-minus-20"><div class="x-small color-999"> <script type="text/javascript">
//Initialization of categoryValues for printfriendly and picturegallery popup
// Variables required for DART. MUST BE IN THE HEAD.
var time = new Date();
randnum = (time.getTime());
var categoryValues = '';
if (document.referrer != null) {
if (document.referrer.match(".google.") != null ||
document.referrer.match(".yahoo.") != null ||
document.referrer.match(".lycos.") != null ||
document.referrer.match(".ask.") != null ||
document.referrer.match(".msn.") != null) {
categoryValues = '!category=sunoverlays;';
}
}
</script> </div></div><div class="float-left position-relative margin-top-minus-22"><span class="small"> </span></div><div class="float-left position-relative margin-top-minus-22"><span class="small">From </span><span class="byline">The Times</span></div><div class="small color-666"> May 6, 2009 </div><h1 class="heading"></h1><script src="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/js/m24-image-browser.js" type="text/javascript">
</script> <script src="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/js/tol.js" type="text/javascript">
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
/* Global variables that are used for "image browsing". Used on article pages to rotate the images of a story. */
var sImageBrowserImagePath = '';
var aArticleImages = new Array();
var aImageDescriptions = new Array();
var aImageEnlargeLink = new Array();
var aImageEnlargePopupWidth = '500';
var aImageEnlargePopupHeight = '500';
var aImagePhotographer = new Array();
var nSelectedArticleImage = 0;
var aImageAltText= new Array();
var i=0;
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aArticleImages[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_helicopter_544168a.jpg';
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageDescriptions[i] = "Deborah Haynes gets a friendly soaking from a US pilot after landing in the Green Zone in Baghdad" ;
aImageDescriptions[i] = aImageDescriptions[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageAltText[i] = "Deborah Haynes in Baghdad" ;
aImageAltText[i] = aImageAltText[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageEnlargeLink[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_helicopter_544168a.jpg';
i=i+1;
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aArticleImages[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_tea_544181a.jpg';
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageDescriptions[i] = "Sipping tea in the city while wearing a traditional headscarf" ;
aImageDescriptions[i] = aImageDescriptions[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageAltText[i] = "Deborah Haynes in Baghdad" ;
aImageAltText[i] = aImageAltText[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageEnlargeLink[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_tea_544181a.jpg';
i=i+1;
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aArticleImages[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_tank_544165a.jpg';
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageDescriptions[i] = "With a British tank crew" ;
aImageDescriptions[i] = aImageDescriptions[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageAltText[i] = "Deborah Haynes in Baghdad" ;
aImageAltText[i] = aImageAltText[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageEnlargeLink[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_tank_544165a.jpg';
i=i+1;
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aArticleImages[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_soldiers_544166a.jpg';
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageDescriptions[i] = "With soldiers in the war zone" ;
aImageDescriptions[i] = aImageDescriptions[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageAltText[i] = "Deborah Haynes in Baghdad" ;
aImageAltText[i] = aImageAltText[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageEnlargeLink[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_soldiers_544166a.jpg';
i=i+1;
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aArticleImages[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_child_544182a.jpg';
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageDescriptions[i] = "Deborah with an Iraqi boy in a Basra market" ;
aImageDescriptions[i] = aImageDescriptions[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageAltText[i] = "Deborah Haynes in Baghdad" ;
aImageAltText[i] = aImageAltText[i].replace(/"/g,"\"");
//-->
</script> <script type="text/javascript">
<!--
aImageEnlargeLink[i] = '/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_child_544182a.jpg';
i=i+1;
//-->
</script> <div id="dynamic-image-holder"><img alt="Deborah Haynes in Baghdad" border="0" height="185" src="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00544/haynes_helicopter_544168a.jpg" title="Deborah Haynes in Baghdad" width="385" /></div><div class="article-landscape-image-text-container"> <div class="padding-left-right-10 padding-bottom-7"> <div class="padding-top-5" id="dynamic-image-description"><div class="small color-666"></div><div class="small color-666">Deborah Haynes gets a friendly soaking from a US pilot after landing in the Green Zone in Baghdad</div></div></div></div><div class="pagination-container" id="pagination-container"><div class="image-navigation" id="dynamic-image-navigation"><span class="browser-left-and-right"></span></div><div class="image-navigation" id="dynamic-image-navigation"><span class="browser-left-and-right"><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/xxx" onclick="javascript:return fCreateImageBrowser(4,'landscape','/tol/');"><img alt="" border="0" height="14" src="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/img/global/button/button-left.gif" width="14" /></a></span><span class="tools">Image :</span><span class="x-of-y">1 of 5</span><span class="browser-left-and-right"><a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/xxx" onclick="javascript:return fCreateImageBrowser(1,'landscape','/tol/');"><img alt="" border="0" height="14" src="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/img/global/button/button-right.gif" width="14" /></a></span></div></div><div id="main-article"> <div class="article-author"> <span class="small"></span><span class="byline"> </span></div><div class="article-author"><span class="byline">Deborah Haynes </span> </div></div><div><style type="text/css">
div#related-article-links p a, div#related-article-links p a:visited {
color:#06c;
}
</style> <div id="related-article-links"> <br />
<b>The bundle of $3,000 felt uncomfortable stuffed into my knickers, but I had been advised to stash it there in case my taxi was hijacked during the road trip to Baghdad from Amman. Thankfully, the 11 hours passed uneventfully, apart from a moment of fear as we drove close to Fallujah. It was 2004, and already the city was feared by foreigners. My driver, a Palestinian man, told me to lie down so as not to be seen. Heart-pounding, I pushed the passenger seat right back and lay still until the all-clear. A few weeks later insurgents ambushed, beat and burnt to death four private security guards in Fallujah. Their bodies were strung from a bridge. </b><br />
<br />
It was my first time in the Middle East. I had pleaded with my employer at the time, the French news agency AFP, to let me report on the war, despite having no experience of covering conflict and little knowledge of the region. I didn’t even know what the weather was going to be like. Seeing on the internet that it was snowing in Jordan, I’d packed a ski jacket and snow boots, but Iraq was enjoying a warm spell and I was too embarrassed to admit my error. After a week of suffering, the early stages of trench foot set in. Thankfully, an Iraqi colleague took pity and bought me a pair of flip-flops. <br />
<br />
Another wardrobe blunder was the sleeveless tops that I brought along, failing to consider the conservative dress code. This was hammered home when I overheard an American official tell someone: “That blonde reporter will get herself shot if she carries on like that.” He had seen me jump out of my car and sprint across a bridge to the Health Ministry for a press conference, wearing slightly transparent white trousers and a less than baggy T-shirt. <br />
<br />
Reporting in Baghdad was the ultimate challenge. The car bombs, airstrikes, ambushes and mortar fire meant no shortage of action; while the attempt to create a new government offered an insight into the complicated tribal and religious fabric of Iraqi society.<span style="color: red;"> There was also a crazy sense of chaos.</span> No one obeyed the law because there was no one to enforce it. Well, the US soldiers did, but the thing to remember about them was to steer clear, particularly in the early days when nervous young troops had a reputation for shooting first and asking questions later. <br />
<br />
As friendly as they were to me — I remember one US explosives expert handing me a skipping-rope handle-shaped detonator and inviting me to set off a roadside bomb by giving it a “man tug” — there was no forgetting the danger that they represented to civilians. I met one Iraqi boy after he had been shot in the head when his uncle failed to heed a stop warning at a checkpoint. He was treated at a US hospital and survived, but he will always have a problem with his eyes and legs because of the injury. <br />
<br />
Our office in early 2004 was in a small hotel in central Baghdad. I remember e-mailing friends at home about the hotel defence: a spiky wire across the ground that was manned by a couple of sleepy-looking guards. “It wouldn’t stop a suicide rollerblader,” I joked. Protection was minimal because there had been few attacks against Westerners, but that changed within my first few weeks. One night, a rocket skimmed over our roof and slammed into the one opposite. The noise was terrifying. I hit the floor along with my colleagues.<br />
<br />
Thankfully, no one was hurt. Without thinking, I raced outside to see if any more missiles were falling and scrambled upstairs to the roof. Suddenly a second rocket exploded near by, making me dive under a sheet of corrugated iron. That night, seven hotels containing foreigners were hit, including one by a car bomb. <br />
<br />
Friends and family thought that I was mad wanting to work in Baghdad but my mum and dad supported me, even if it meant sleepless nights for them. I failed to get in touch as often as I should have but, that said, making phone calls was problematic. Initially, communication was via walkie-talkie — handy for filing news to the Baghdad bureau but useless for personal calls. Besides, using one of these brick-like contraptions was always a bit of a spectacle because you had to yell through the speaker. Satellite phones had the range but because of the expense were restricted to work calls. Fortunately mobile phones caught on that summer, though the network remained infuriatingly patchy. <br />
<br />
Most of the comforts that we take for granted in Britain either don’t exist or don’t work well in Iraq. Electricity in our hotel was cut so frequently that conversations would continue without pause when the room was plunged into darkness. Our supply was relatively reliable; many Iraqi families exist on only a few hours of electricity a day. <br />
<br />
After spending seven weeks in Baghdad, I returned to my beat covering world trade and United Nations agencies in Geneva, but I did another two stints that year, before returning at the end of 2005 and the start of 2006, by which time the violence had spiralled out of control. <br />
<br />
One of my scariest moments was covering the aftermath of a suicide car bomb against a General Electric convoy in June 2004 that left 13 people dead, including three GE workers. One of three sports utility vehicles was destroyed along with those on board. Passengers in the other two cars escaped but abandoned their transport. An angry crowd of Iraqi men had gathered by the time I arrived. I spotted what looked like the charred torsos of two victims through the shattered windscreen of the bombed SUV. They were the first dead bodies that I had seen in Iraq, but the situation was too chaotic to register any emotion. As I stood amid the wreckage, the mob began to shout anti-American slogans and wave sticks. Iraqi police and US soldiers were also there. The police shot into the air, but the gunfire only aggravated the men further. <br />
<br />
Suddenly the rioters surged towards me. My instinct was to run but my Iraqi interpreter told me to remain calm and walk clear. Looking back, I saw the crowd climb on to one of the vehicles, smash the windows and set it ablaze. We sheltered in a nearby police box until things calmed down and my interpreter was able to talk to the mob. It was safer for him to go without me, a hated Westerner. <br />
<br />
By the end of that year, it became imperative to adopt a disguise to hide my blonde hair and blue eyes. I always felt like one of the idiotic Thomson and Thompson detectives in <i>Tintin</i> when I donned a long, black robe and headscarf, as if I was stereotyping the Iraqi population. Despite these misgivings, the garb enabled me to venture outside, though trips became limited because of the kidnap threat. <br />
<br />
One of the bleakest days was when news broke that Margaret Hassan, the Anglo-Irish aid worker, had been shot dead several weeks after being kidnapped by Sunni extremists. That these people could kill a 59-year-old woman who had lived in Iraq for three decades and had dedicated her life to the country was a wake-up call. I was too scared to leave my hotel for a fortnight. Even when an Iraqi official sent two cars packed with armed guards to take me out for lunch, I got as far as the hotel car park before losing my nerve and retreating back indoors. <br />
<br />
Insurgency warfare is a strange creature. Attacks are shocking only until something worse happens. This generates a kind of acceptance of the violence. For example, a bomb that killed 15 people in 2004 would dominate the news. Three years later it would barely be given a mention. News wires used to mark “urgent” the death of a US soldier. By 2006, three needed to die to get such attention. <br />
<br />
I hated this sense of war fatigue not because the lack of interest meant fewer stories in the paper for me but because bombs still shattered Iraqi lives and the outside world no longer reacted. The longer that I spent in Iraq, the more painful it became to see the devastation wrought. <br />
<br />
Speak to any ordinary Iraqi and he or she will have a story of suffering that would be impossible for most British people to conceive. One woman described how her husband was shot dead by militiamen in front of her. Months later, the widow’s father was kidnapped and drilled to death. The woman still managed a smile as she spoke of her hope for the future. <br />
<br />
People ask me whether I think it was all worthwhile — a difficult question as I never visited Iraq when Saddam Hussein was in power. But I can’t help feeling, whether or not Iraq becomes a stable country, that nothing will compensate for the hundreds of thousands of lives lost or damaged. <br />
<br />
Being a foreign correspondent in Baghdad was not all about death and fear. It was possible to relax by the two circular pools at our hotel but even then, mysteriously, helicopters would always seem to circle overhead whenever a female reporter went for a dip, while staff from the hotel would also find a stubborn stain on the tiles by the water’s edge that would require attention for the duration of the swim. <br />
<br />
There was a fairly lively social scene, even in the darkest days, with different bureaus throwing parties within their blast-walled compounds or holding impromptu gatherings that ended with bursts of late-night dancing to Madonna classics. I broke two mobile phones diving fully clothed into a swimming pool at our hotel during one particularly lively bash. <br />
<br />
The fortified Green Zone conceals a titillating nightlife that is ready to be sampled, provided you know the right people to get your name on the guest list — namely someone from one of the many foreign missions. Some of the most surreal experiences are the parties at the Italian Embassy. Imagine freshly-cooked pizza, toxic cocktails and dancing on a balcony that overlooks a courtyard where diplomats, aid workers and journalists groove to thumping Euro-pop. In the summer, the Italian guards would strip down to the waist and spray revellers with cold water. <br />
<br />
There were lonely and frustrating times as well. Even buying groceries was tricky. I used to get one of my drivers to pick up fruit and cans of tuna and sweetcorn for me from the local supermarket because going myself involved taking both drivers and a guard. I also missed my friends, though I struck up friendships with fellow journalists, hanging out watching DVDs or gossiping. A young Iraqi woman who once worked as an interpreter for the US military, but quit because of personal problems, would also regularly pop round for a coffee and a chat about her troubled love life. <br />
<br />
I became an Iraq correspondent for <i>The Times</i> in May 2007. At the time, death squads ruled parts of Baghdad and hundreds of civilians were killed each week. Ten days after my arrival, five British men were kidnapped from a Finance Ministry compound by scores of gunmen dressed in police uniform. Two years later they are still being held, pawns in a much larger political game. <br />
<br />
Running the <i>Times</i> bureau — also inside a rundown Baghdad hotel — was a novel experience. Within six months, my interpreter fled to Syria, claiming that he had been the target of a kidnap plot, and one of my security guards quit after being caught up in a roadside bomb or car crash — he never quite got his story straight. A second guard has since been arrested. He is still in jail, though, as far as I can make out, has not yet been charged. Thankfully, two drivers, a pair of brothers who have worked for the paper since the invasion, remain on the team. They treated me like a sister, always making sure that I felt safe and cheering me up if I looked glum. My last interpreter was also a lovely character who provided an invaluable viewpoint on Iraq, correcting me whenever I made a cultural mistake, such as trying to shake an Iraqi man’s hand — many prefer not to shake hands with women. <br />
<br />
It was hard to say goodbye after five years, but I know (or I hope) that I’ll be back. Until then I must watch from a distance as the country tries to recover, though I worry what will happen as American forces pull out. There has been a gradual improvement in security over the past year, but bombs continue to claim lives and it remains unwise to shed guards and disguises. That said, in my final days in Baghdad in April I sometimes cruised around with just a driver and stayed calm if I’d forgoten to pack a headscarf. <br />
<br />
Back in East London, it is taking time to adjust to “normal life”. On the plus side, I can clean my teeth without fear that brown-coloured liquid will spurt out of the tap. And, of course, I no longer have to keep cash in my underwear. <br />
</div></div><br />
<div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-21188839977515567632009-05-07T23:44:00.000+04:002009-05-07T23:44:47.165+04:00Republicans Blackmail Holder <b><i><span style="color: #660000;"> </span></i></b><br />
<b><i><span style="color: #660000;">As independents, we don't give a flying rats arse under which political party crimes, like torture or renditions to nations known to torture, were committed. We want it all to come out.</span></i></b> <i><b style="color: #660000;">The sooner the better!</b></i><br />
<h1></h1><h2><span style="font-size: small;">Posted: Thursday, May 07, 2009 12:16 PM by Domenico Montanaro<br />
Filed Under: <a href="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/category/1021.aspx" id="_ctl0____ctl0____ctl0___Entry___Tags___Categories__ctl1_Link" rel="tag">Republicans</a>, <a href="http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/category/1308.aspx" id="_ctl0____ctl0____ctl0___Entry___Tags___Categories__ctl3_Link" rel="tag">Pete Williams</a></span> </h2><div style="clear: both;"><strong>From NBC's Pete Williams</strong><br />
</div><table align="left" cellpadding="5" cellspacing="0" style="width: 1px;"><tbody>
<tr> <td align="left"><img border="0" hspace="0" src="http://msnbcmedia2.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Bylines/mugs/NBC%20News/nbc_williams_pete.thumb.jpg" style="border: 1px solid rgb(0, 0, 0);" /></td></tr>
<tr> <td align="left" class="credit"><br />
</td></tr>
</tbody></table><br />
<b>At a hearing today with Attorney General <strong>Eric Holder</strong>, Republican members of a Senate Appropriations subcommittee suggested that any potential criminal investigation into the CIA's harsh interrogation methods might not easily be contained.<br />
</b><br />
<br />
Both<strong> Lamar Alexander</strong> of Tennessee and <strong>Richard Shelby</strong> of Alabama pressed Holder on the CIA's "rendition" program that moved terrorism suspects from one country to another. <br />
<div style="clear: both;"></div><div style="clear: both;">Didn't that happen during the Clinton administration? <br />
</div><div style="clear: both;">Yes, Holder said. </div><div style="clear: both;"></div><div style="clear: both;">"How many did you approve?" they asked. <br />
</div><div style="clear: both;">Holder said he'd check the record. </div><div style="clear: both;"></div><div style="clear: both;">The clear suggestion was, if any criminal investigation is opened, Republicans would push to get it expanded beyond events during the Bush administration. Alexander, for example, asked several times whether members of Congress, who were told about the interrogation methods, should also be investigated.</div><div style="clear: both;"></div><div style="clear: both;">As for a potential investigation of the lawyers who wrote the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel opinions approving harsh interrogation methods, Holder said -- as he has several times now -- that he remains skeptical. </div><div style="clear: both;"></div><div style="clear: both;">"We're not trying to do anything that would be perceived as partisan,” he said. “We want to move forward to the extent we can." </div><div style="clear: both;"></div><div style="clear: both;">Today's hearing also provided another avenue for members of Congress to tell the Obama administration they're very worried about bringing Guantanamo Bay detainees into the U.S., where they might be released. Holder said no one who was dangerous or a threat to the community would be released anywhere in the world. </div><div style="clear: both;"></div><div style="clear: both;"><em>[EDITOR'S NOTE: An earlier version of this post incorrectly identified the committee Holder testified before as Judiciary. This version corrects that, pointing out that it was an Appropriations subcommittee.]</em></div><br />
<div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-27776871396945204022009-05-07T23:31:00.000+04:002009-05-07T23:31:36.291+04:00Some Real News<table border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="0" style="width: 730px;"><tbody>
<tr><td><div style="padding: 0px 0px 4px 11px;"><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: small;"><b><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: small;"><b>News stories</b></span></b></span></div></td><td align="right"><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: x-small;">May 3, 2009</span></td></tr>
</tbody></table><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: x-small;"><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody>
<tr valign="top"><td><a href="http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=890919&l=36293&ctl=164447C:C20A36FA83ED1C033210D6330CA990DBEDC3615173C7E546&" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><img alt="" border="0" class="EC_precispicture" height="45" src="http://therealnews.com/media/banners/trnnetwork-thumb.jpg" style="padding: 0px 10px 0px 0px;" width="80" /></a></td><td><span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: x-small;"><strong><a href="http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=890919&l=36293&ctl=164447C:C20A36FA83ED1C033210D6330CA990DBEDC3615173C7E546&" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="color: black;"><br />
More from The Real News</span></a></strong></span><br />
<span style="color: black; font-family: arial; font-size: x-small;">Watch more news stories on the economy, US politics and the climate change crisis from around the world <a href="http://premiere.whatcounts.com/t?r=1664&c=890919&l=36293&ctl=164447C:C20A36FA83ED1C033210D6330CA990DBEDC3615173C7E546&" style="text-decoration: none;" target="_blank"><span style="color: #0099ff;">view</span></a></span></td></tr>
</tbody></table></span><div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><br />
</b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><br />
</b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-35766179627105306042009-05-02T18:57:00.000+04:002009-05-02T18:57:28.688+04:00Has Cheney been Murdering Americans?<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">April 12, 2009</span></b><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: medium;"><br />
</span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><i>By Jim Fetzer</i></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Madison, WI (OpEdNews) April 12, 2009 --The stunning revelation from our nation’s premiere investigative reporter, Seymour Hersh, that Vice President Dick Cheney was running an “executive assassination ring” directly under his control and outside of the normal chain of command has raised the specter that the Vice President of the United States may have been murdering Americans. As a scholar who has invested a considerable effort in the investigation of the death of US Senator Paul Wellstone, this comes as no surprise. I and other experts with whom I have collaborated long since concluded that the crash that took his life and those of his wife, daughter, three aides and two pilots was brought about deliberately, where Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Karl Rove are the principal suspects. Other cases in which assassination appears all too probable include those of NFL star Pat Tillman and of 9/11 activist Beverly Eckert.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">According to <a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/cheney-assassination-unit-still-active-under-obama-including-domestically.html">Paul Joseph Watson</a>, <span style="color: #333333;">the </span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Joint Special Operations Command </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="color: #333333;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">(JSOC) did not originate with Cheney but was founded in 1980, which suggests that it may have been initiated by our then-Vice President George H. W. Bush, a former Director of the CIA. It consists primarily of Delta Force soldiers and SEALs, who are stationed at Pope Air Force Base and at Fort Bragg, NC. According to Watson, this assassination unit is still active under President Obama. The very existence of an operation of this kind raises questions of the utmost seriousness about democracy in America. What has become of this country when the expression of your political convictions and the pursuit of what you think best for this nation runs the risk of bringing about your termination? When our elected officials, like Hitler and Stalin, have the power to decide whether we live or die depending on their whims, this country has ceased to be the home of the brave or the land of the free.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Outing an “Executive Assassination Ring”</span></span></span></b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The story broke on <a href="http://www.minnpost.com/ericblackblog/2009/03/11/7310/investigative_reporter_seymour_hersh_describes_executive_assassination_ring"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">Minn Post.com</span></a> (March 11, 2009), when Eric Black wrote of a “Great Conversation” even at the University of Minnesota, where, during the question and answer session, Hersh reported not only that the CIA has been “deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state” but that a special unit of our military called the JSOC was set up independently of the normal chain of command, reporting only to the Vice President and to neither the Joint Chiefs or even the Secretary of Defense: </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;">“Congress has no oversight of it,” Hersh explained. “It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on.…</span></em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"> <em>Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the Ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on in the name of all of us.” </em> </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">If the only targets were foreign terrorists who were threatening to attack the United States, of course, many Americans might be sympathetic and even forgiving. But, after publishing ten news columns, co-authoring a book, and following up with an expert in extending the scope of my research about the death of Senator Paul Wellstone, it would not surprise me whatsoever that Dick Cheney deployed one of these JSOC teams to bring about his death.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The crucial consideration in evaluating alternative hypotheses in cases like these—such as accident or assassination—is calculating the probability of the evidence on the assumption that each of them is true and comparing their values. These are known as “likelihood” measures of evidential support, where the hypothesis that confers the highest probability on the evidence qualifies as the preferable hypothesis. When the available evidence “settles down” (that is, points in the same direction), then the preferable hypothesis is also acceptable as true, in the tentative and fallible fashion of science.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The Death of Sen. Paul Wellstone</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The plane crash that took the life of Senator Paul Wellstone occurred on October 25, 2002, just ten days before the election that pitted him against former St. Paul Mayor, Norm Coleman. It was widely known in Washington that the Bush leadership had <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/well-o29.shtml">targeted Wellstone</a> for elimination, although most would have assumed that was politically speaking rather than literally. One of the first to raise alarms was Michael Niman, a professor at Buffalo State College, who enumerated reasons why they wanted to get rid of him. In an early article, <a href="http://www.alternet.org/story/14399/?page=1"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">"Was Paul Wellstone Murdered?"</span></a> (October 28, 2002), he explained that Wellstone was the only progressive in the US Senate and an outspoken critic of the Bush administration. No one knew of Cheney’s assassination unit, but the circumstances of his death raised suspicions on their own. <a href="http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/oct2002/well-o29.shtml">Control of Congress</a> hung in the balance, since Jim Jeffords (R-VT) had left the Republican Party and become an independent. There were 50 Democrats and 49 Republicans.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">On the day of the crash, several signs suggested to me that something was not right. The crash had occurred at about 10:22 AM/CT, but the site was not discovered until 11 AM/CT by Gary Ulman, the Eveleth-Virginia Airport assistant manager, who then landed and picked up the local fire chief so they could fly over the crash site—which was in a wooded, swampy area—and figure out the best way to bring equipment to the scene. Remarkably, when Rick Wahlberg, the Sheriff of St. Louis Country arrived there at 1:30 PM/CT, he encountered members of the FBI’s Rapid Response Team from St. Paul, whom he knew personally, who told him that they had been there since noon. Christopher Bollyn, a reporter for American Free Press, noted in an article published on October 29, 2002, this was remarkable insofar as Gary Ulman had not notified them. Indeed, when I calculated the minimal time it would have taken to fly from St. Paul to Duluth, rent a car and drive to the crash scene, they had to have taken off at about 9:30 AM/CT, which was the same time the Senator’s plane had departed. It was very strange.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Moreover, after the plane crashed, even though the wings (which carry the fuel supply) had been sheared off by the surrounding trees and the tail had broken off (a common occurrence in plane crashes), the fuselage burned so intensely for seven hours the firemen were unable to extinguish it and the bodies would not be recovered until the following day. Nonetheless, an FBI spokesman, Paul McCabe, would announce that night that there were “no signs of terrorist involvement”. That struck me as rather odd, because terrorists are simply assailants with specific political motivation, who do not have special access to techniques for sabotaging aircraft. Since the cause of the crash was not yet known, how could the FBI have possibly known? It would be more than a year before the NTSB would announce its findings. According to its official report, the plane crashed because the pilots had lost track of their airspeed and allowed the plane to crash. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The plane, a King Air A-100, was akin to the Rolls-Royce of small aircraft and had an excellent maintenance record. While there had been many exaggerated reports about the weather—Wolf Blitzer, for example, attributed the crash to freezing rain and heavy snow—those of us in the vicinity knew that was not true. Indeed, a local TV-news anchorman, Denny Anderson, who was himself a pilot, spent much of the day correcting those false impressions. It turned out that other planes had landed there earlier in the day and that Ulman had had no hesitation in taking off to search for the plane when he noticed it was overdue. A pilot in the local vicinity, who had been out taking pictures across water in close proximity of the airport, sent them to me. It was clear by studying them that there was no rain, much less freezing rain. Indeed, the NTSB would eventually conduct simulations of the flight with pilots from Charter Aviation and, even though they had them fly abnormally slowly, they were unable to cause the plane to crash.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The NTSB Report</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The NTSB pinned responsibility for the crash on the pilots. The principal pilot, Richard Conry, however, had some 5,200 hours of experience, an Air Transport Pilots certification--which is the highest civilian qualification short of astronaut—and had passed his FAA “flight check” just two days before the fatal flight. His co-pilot, Michael Guess, was not as highly qualified, but he was a competent pilot for a plane that did not require two. Indeed, one of the ironies of the FBI’s announcement is that Guess turned out to have known Zacharias Moussaoui, an accused 9/11 conspirator, whom he had met at the Pam Am International Flight Academic in Eagan, MN, where he had allegedly “inadvertently” allowed Moussaoui access to a computer program about flying a Boeing 747. So not only could the FBI not have known there was “no terrorist involvement” the evening of the crash but the co-pilot would turn out to have actually had contact with an alleged terrorist.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Several features of the crash caught my attention early on. Although there were two pilots, there had been no distress call. A loss of air speed brings with it a loss of altitude, and the plane had crashed two miles south of the airport, apparently flying on the wrong azimuth. I began to ask myself the probability that two pilots would neglect their air speed, their altitude, and their azimuth. If we assume that these are independent events that might happen, say, one time in a hundred—an absurdly high frequency—then for one pilot to neglect all three would be equal to 1/100 x 1/100 x 1/100 = 1/1,000,000 or one time in a million. And there had been two of them, where the probability that they would both neglect those factors was equal to 1/1,000,000 x 1/1,000,000, a very small number. And the plane was equipped with a loud warning alarm to alert them of any risk of stalling.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The more I investigated the case, the more peculiar it seemed. An odd cell-phone anomaly was reported to me, where the driver, passing just south of the airport en route to the funeral the senator had planned to attend, heard a loud wailing and war-belling sound, unlike anything he had heard before. I contracted an Australian colleague, John P. Costella, who has a Ph.D. in electromagnetism, and asked him if this could have been an effect of the use of a high-tech weapon, which could take out all the planes electronics, including its navigation system, communication system, and stall warning alarm. It would turn out that the props were on idle when it crashed, which the NTSB was unable to explain. A directed-energy weapon could not only have taken out the plane’s electronics, including its communications and navigation systems, but flipped the solenoids that control the pitch of the props and set them to “idle”. The more that I studied the case, the more it appeared that the plane was not under their control. They had apparently been unable to stop it.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">AMERICAN ASSASSINATION</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">By this time, I had published ten columns on the case in an alternative newspaper in Duluth, which had led a Native American scholar from Northern Arizona University to contact me and offer to be co-author if I were disposed to turn my research into a book. We had both learned of an incident shortly before the crash where veterans at a meeting in Wilmer, MN, had learned from Wellstone that he had been threatened by Cheney, who told him that, if he opposed the administration on Iraq, there would be “severe ramifications” for him personally and for the state of Minnesota, which I confirmed with veterans who were there. He (Wellstone) had gone ahead and made a speech opposing the invasion of Iraq, which he thought might end his political career. Instead, he surged ahead of Coleman and was running 6-8 points and gaining at the time of the crash. Rove’s hand-picked candidate was going to lose to Wellstone.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">We announced the publication of <a href="http://www.amazon.com/American-Assassination-Strange-Senator-Wellstone/dp/0975276301"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">AMERICAN ASSASSINATION</span></a> (2004) at the National Press Club exactly two years after the crash. My co-author, Don “Four Arrows” Jacobs, and I observed that the official account of the crash had a vanishing probability and that the NTSB had only considered accident-compatible alternatives, but that if you considered the possible use of a small bomb, a gas canister or a high-tech, directed-energy device, then the latter would confer a high probability upon the evidence, including the lack of any distress call, the odd cell-phone anomaly, and reports I had confirmed that garage doors in the vicinity had opened spontaneously that morning. I flew John to Minnesota and we visited the crash scene together in 35 degree-below-zero weather, picking up pieces of debris, studying the damage to the trees, and making other observations. He and I would also review some 2,500 pages of official documents and studies on which the NSTB report was purportedly based, where its report ran only sixty pages.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">John Costella made the remarkable discovery of an odd meteorological phenomenon in the atmosphere above the crash site, where clouds that were normally loaded with ice were filled with water instead. This would be otherwise inexplicable, since the heat from the intense fire would fall off as a function of distance from its location. But it would be a predictable effect of the use of a directed-energy weapon. We authored a report, <a href="http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/070605_wellstone.shtml"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">“The NTSB Failed Wellstone"</span></a>, summarizing our findings, which Michael Ruppert would publish in his “From the Wilderness” newsletter. Indeed, his own research would lead him to the same conclusion, as he explained in his <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Crossing-Rubicon-Decline-American-Empire/dp/0865715408"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">CROSSING THE RUBICON</span></a> (2004). Ruppert had even been contacted by someone in the business of assassinations (“wet work”), who told him that some reinvigorated old white guys were in charge, that they were nobody to screw around with, and that he could anticipate there would be other “strategic accidents” in the future.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">My own inference is that this was a small-scale conspiracy, which might have involved as few as ten persons. The King Air A-100 is manufactured by Beechcraft, which is owned by Raytheon. A military-industrial colossus, this company also owns numerous patents for directed-energy weapons. I believe it could have been as simple a matter as a phone call from one of the directors of Charter Aviation to Dick Cheney, telling him that Wellstone would be aboard. After consultation with Rumsfeld and Rove, a phone call to Raytheon would provide the information necessary about the best way to take the plane down. A small team from the JSOC could be entrusted with the assignment, where the crucial problem would be to lure the plane into the kill zone, apparently by manipulating the on-board GPS system, which is completely under military control. I even discovered corroboration that this is how it was done, as I have explained in a one-hour <a href="http://www.youtube.com/w/?v=vyNzys-KutA"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">video lecture</span></a> about 25-30 minutes into the program. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The Death of Cpl. Pat Tillman</span></span></span></b><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">There are typical signs that something is wrong in the case of deaths that have political ramifications. These include obfuscation about the cause of the event, especially by creating a false “first impression”, which tends to stick in the minds of most Americans. In the Wellstone case, it was that the cause had been the weather. In the case of Pat Tillman, it was that he had been killed in a fire-fight in Afghanistan. Although I shall not discuss it with the same degree of detail, the Tillman death appears to bear the signs that this, too, was an assassination. An article on Tillman in<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Tillman"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;"> Wikipedia</span></a>, exclusively based upon public sources, provides ample indications of the blatancy with which political killings can take place and then be covered up, especially by assassins who were themselves members of the military. (To insure its availability, I have archived it <a href="http://assassinationscience.com/">here</a> under “Assassination”.)</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">An NFL star who enlisted in the Army in May 2002, he apparently became disenchanted with the conduct of the war. He not only did not support President Bush for reelection, but encouraged others to vote for John Kerry. According to his mother, a friend of his had arranged for him to meet with Noam Chomsky, professor emeritus from MIT and one of our nation’s most respected public intellectuals, who, no doubt, could have launched him into prominent orbit as an outspoken opponent of the war. In my opinion, the prospect of having a macho, NFL-complement to Cindy Sheehan—one who might inspire the nation to reconsider our involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan—would have been a powerful incentive for removing him from the public arena in the minds of Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Karl Rove. </span></span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> The use of these special operations military serving as an 'assassination ring' in this situation may very well have been irresistible.</span></span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">According to Wikipedia’s entry about him, Tillman was redeployed to Afghanistan and, on April 22, 2004, he was killed. The Army initially claimed that he and his unit were hit by an ambush on a road outside a village not far from the Pakistan border. The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Special_Operations_Command"><span style="color: #1d31ae; text-decoration: none;">Army Special Operations Command</span></a> initially claimed that there was an exchange with hostile forces, but an investigation conducted by the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Department_of_Defense"><span style="color: #1d31ae; text-decoration: none;">U.S. Department of Defense</span></a> concluded that his death was due to friendly fire “aggravated by the intensity of the firefight”. Another, more thorough investigation, concluded that hostile forces had not been involved in the firefight and that two allied groups fired on each other in confusion after a nearby explosive device was detonated. But it also makes these points:</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">* No evidence of enemy fire at the scene has ever been produced;</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">* The lieutenant general who withheld details of Tillman's death from his parents for months told investigators "he had a bad memory, and could not recall details of his actions" on more than 70 occasions;</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> * According to The Washington Post, on May 4, 2005, the Army’s own investigators were aware that Tillman had been killed by being shot three times in the head;</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> * Senior Army commanders, including Gen. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Abizaid"><span style="color: #1d31ae; text-decoration: none;">John Abizaid</span></a>, knew of this fact within days of the shooting but nevertheless approved him for the Siver Star, the Purple Heart, and a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posthumous_promotion"><span style="color: #1d31ae; text-decoration: none;">posthumous promotion</span></a>;</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> * Army doctors told the investigators that these wounds suggested murder and urged them to launch a criminal investigation, which would not be pursued; and</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">* Army attorneys congratulated each other in emails for impeding criminal investigation as they concluded that Tillman's death was the result of friendly fire, and that only administrative, or non-criminal, punishment was indicated.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Evidence and Likelihoods</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">When we consider the alternatives of accident or assassination in this case, we have to compare their likelihoods In relation to the<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-07-26-tillman-friendly-fire_N.htm"> available evidence</a>. If Tillman had been killed accidentally, even by “friendly fire”, then what is the probability that no evidence of friendly fire would be produced, that the Lt. General would suffer 70 “memory lapses”, that the corporal would have been shot three times in the head, that honors would be bestowed upon him, that the doctors would have suspected he was murdered, and that Army attorneys would impede criminal investigations? You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to conclude that something is very wrong here. The probability of these effects appears to be very high if he was deliberately taken out and very low if his death was accidental, friendly fire or not.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">And there is more. On July 26, 2007, for example, the AP received official documents stating that the doctors who performed the autopsy suspected that Tillman was <a href="http://www.editorialandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_dislay.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003617692"><span style="color: #0d14e7; text-decoration: none;">murdered</span></a>. High ranking officers knew better at least four days before his nationally televised memorial service during which he “was lauded as a war hero for dying while engaging the enemy”. Members of Tillman's unit burned his <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_armor"><span style="color: #1d31ae; text-decoration: none;">body armor</span></a> and uniform. Tillman's diary was never returned to his family, and its whereabouts are not publicly <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/21/politics/21tillman.html"><span style="color: #0d14e7; text-decoration: none;">known</span></a>. <span style="color: red;"> As a former Marine Corps commissioned officer, I affirm that this treatment of the personal property of a deceased is not proper procedure. The missing diary is especially striking, since diaries are legally admissible as evidence in courts of law and would have attested to his state of mind.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<div style="color: red;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Some prominent news personalities have figured out that something seems to be wrong. On July 26, 2007, for example, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Matthews"><span style="text-decoration: none;">Chris Matthews</span></a> reported that Tillman's death might have been a case of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frag_%28military%29"><span style="text-decoration: none;">fragging</span></a> (of the deliberate killing of a soldier by his comrades at arms) because the bullet holes were tight and neat, suggesting that he was shot at close range. Matthews based his speculation on a report from the doctors who investigated Tillman's body. The following day the <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-07-26-tillman-friendly-fire-N.htm">AP reported</a> that a doctor who examined Tillman's body after his death wrote, "The medical evidence did not match up with the, with the scenario as described," also noting that the wound entrances appeared as though he had been shot with an <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M16_rifle"><span style="text-decoration: none;">M16 rifle</span></a> from less than 10 yards (9 m) away.” Even his mother, in her disturbing book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Booots-Ground-Dusk-Tribute-Tillman/dp/1594868808">BOOTS ON THE GROUND BY DUSK</a> (2008), has been shaken by the way the military has handled the death of her son. </span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The Official Finding</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">On March 26, 2007, the Pentagon released their report on the events surrounding Tillman's death and cover-up. The report reads in part:</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;">we emphasize that all investigators established the basic facts of CPL Tillman's death -- that it was caused by friendly fire, that the occupants of one vehicle in CPL Tillman's platoon were responsible, and that circumstances on the ground caused those occupants to misidentify friendly forces as hostile. None of the investigations suggested that CPL Tillman's death was anything other than accidental. Our review, as well as the investigation recently completed by Army CID, obtained no evidence contrary to those key findings.</span></em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The denial of contrary evidence appears to be contrived. If the doctors even suspected murder, if there were three shots to the head, and if they were tightly grouped and appeared to have been fired from close range by an M-16 from less than 10 yards away, the “friendly fire” scenario looks more and more like deliberate misinformation. <span style="color: red;">Tillman is not the kind of man his fellow soldiers would frag. On the contrary, he is just the kind of guy—and football star, no less—his fellow soldiers would have respected and admired. He’s the kind of guy they would have written home about! Indeed, the article confirms that Tillman "was popular among his fellow soldiers and had no enemies". They harbored no reason to murder him.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">He may have been killed by a member of the armed forces, which could have been obscured by the use of the phrase, “friendly fire”, but it would not have been by his comrades in arms. </span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Interestingly, there are reports of snipers in a <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=473037&in_paage_id=1770"><span style="color: #0d14e7; text-decoration: none;">second group</span></a> of troops that encountered Pat's squad shortly before an explosive device went off and the shooting started. This looks like an ideal situation in which a designated assassin, who was a member of this second group, could have used the chaotic conditions created by the detonation of a distracting explosive device to take out a man who could have become an outspoken opponent of the war, especially if the members of this ring are military. In my opinion, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove would not have let his opposition to the war become public knowledge. His death does not appear to have been an accident.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The Death of a 9/11 Activist</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: red;">The </span><a href="http://fr.truveo.com/Breaking-Raw-Home-Video-Continental-Flight-3407/id/3154036825" style="color: red;">plane crash</a><span style="color: red;"> that took the life of 9/11 activist Beverly Eckert troubled me because of its striking similarities to the crash that took the life of Paul Wellstone.</span> The plane, a Bombardier Q400, was an excellent commuter carrier with a 74-passenger capacity. Like the King Air A-100, it had no history of mechanical problems. <a href="http://blogfreetv.com/blogs/msnbc-news/1835/2009-bufalo-new-york/">Philip Trenary</a>, the head of the Pinnacle Airlines that operated the plane, stated, “It’s an aircraft that’s had flawless service.” Reports of the weather appear to have been greatly exaggerated, where the plane, like the King Air A-100, was equipped with sophisticated de-icing equipment. <span style="color: red;">Moreover—and this is especially notable—there was no distress call from the plane. According to an </span><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/Business/story?id=6870612&page=1" style="color: red;"><span style="text-decoration: none;">early report,</span></a><span style="color: red;"> Flight 3407 came straight down out of the sky, killing 50 persons, including Eckert.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">There have been several stories about the crash in The New York Times, for example, including “Crew Reported 'Significant Ice Buildup' Before Crash” (February 14, 2009), “In Plane Crash, Loss of Momentum Still a Mystery” (February 15, 2009), and “Recreating a Plane Crash” (February 19 2009), where Matthew L. Wald offers speculation that the crew might have “overreacted” to a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/19/nyregion/19crash.html?th&emc=th"><span style="color: #0d14e7; text-decoration: none;">computerized flight-control system</span></a> “trying to protect the aircraft from flying too slowly, going into a stall and crashing”.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: red;">Unfortunately, there are a number of disturbing signs that what we are being told does not add up. Consider the alleged ice-buildup. </span> That report seems to be contradicted by the transcript of the final communications, as What Really Happened has highlighted, which has been compounded by another <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/14/nyregion/14crash.html?th&emc=th"><span style="color: #0d14e7; text-decoration: none;">exaggerated report</span></a> about the ice build-up in The New York Times. A<span style="color: red;"> very different impression comes from </span><em style="color: red;">Last moments of Buffalo Flight 3407, Webmaster's Commentary</em><span style="color: red;">, </span><em style="color: red;">What Really Happened</em><span style="color: red;">, on </span><em style="color: red;">February 13, 2009</em><span style="color: red;"> (</span><em style="color: red;"><a href="http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/">www.whatreallyhappened.com</a>) as follows:</em></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Read the transcript of the final communications from Colgan Flight 3407 in Buffalo.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">No mention of ice being a problem for aircraft.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">There is a brief incidental mention that there is an area of icing, but it is clear that nobody sees this as a problem. No mention of any problems at all.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">3407 is there one moment, then gone the next.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Now, look at this line from the transcript:</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;">17:40 - Delta 1998: Uh negative, Delta 1998, we're just in the bottoms and nothing on the TKs …</span></em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Listening to the tape, it sounds like what the pilot of 1998 said was </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;">"... nothing on the TCAS."</span></em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;">TCAS (pronounced T-cass) stands for Traffic Collision Avoidance System, which sends out a lower power non-directional radar pulse and listens for any aircraft transponders in the vicinity in order to warn pilots of close approaching aircraft.</span></em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"></span></em><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;">So, what the pilot of Delta 1998 is saying is that at the time Air Traffic Control asked him to look for a Dash-8 [Bombardier] at 2300 [feet altitude], 3407's radar transponders had quit working.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">One final note:</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">If the Air Traffic Controller is telling the pilot of Delta 1998 to look at 2300 feet altitude for the Dash 8, then that means the last altitude reading returned to the ATC was 2300 feet.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Air Traffic Radar never received a return showing a loss of altitude, which strongly suggests that the aircraft's entire avionics (aircraft electronic control) system quit working while the plane was still half a mile in the air. </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">______________</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Now this suggests to me that the reason there was no distress call is that the aircraft's entire avionics system quit working while the plane was still half a mile in the air. What could possibly explain this? There are several disturbing parallels with the Wellstone crash: the plane was an excellent aircraft, very forgiving, with sophisticated equipment, including for de-icing; the weather reports have exaggerated conditions, which were actually rather mild, where other planes had had no problems coping with them on their approach into Buffalo; and both of the pilots were well-qualified. I am also struck that Beverly Eckert, a 9/11 widow, was aboard the plane. The situations here, including political motivation, appear to be parallel.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Why Beverly Might Matter</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">She was a prominent 9/11 activist whose husband had died that day in the South Tower of the World Trade Center. She had actually met with none other than President Barack Obama shortly before flying back to Buffalo to honor her late husband's birthday. She was a member of “The Jersey Girls”, four 9/11 widows, whose efforts to promote an investigation of 9/11 made a <span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: ArialMT; font-size: 17px;"><a href="http://notruerhearts.blogspot.com/2009/01/911-press-for-truth-uneven-critique-of.html"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: small;">crucial contribution</span></a><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 13px;"> to the creation of the commission, which President George Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had opposed. <span style="color: red;">It is no exaggeration to observe that Cheney and the Neo-Cons—to this day—fear more than anything else a bona-fide, objective investigation into 9/11 (motive). </span> </span></span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: ArialMT; font-size: 17px;"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 13px;">Because Obama kept Robert Gates on as Secretary of Defense, no doubt, lingering elements of Cheney’s operation, including members of the assassination ring, almost certainly still exercise influence within the Pentagon (means), where, as in the case of Wellstone, this flight could very well have offered the perfect occasion to take her out of the equation (opportunity). </span></span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">The argument has been made that Beverly was not committed to 9/11 as “an inside job”, which may have made her all the more threatening. For a woman whose husband was killed on 9/11, who had refused to take the government’s proffered compensation—widely regarded as “hush money” in the 9/11 movement—her insistence upon further investigation of the case would have been alarming to those who were involved. Bush and Cheney were adamantly opposed to any investigation and, when they were forced to create a commission of inquiry, they did their best to manage it from within. <span style="color: red;">In fact, Mike Ruppert’s book, </span><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Crossing-Rubicon-Decline-American-Empire/dp/0865715408" style="color: red;"><span style="text-decoration: none;">CROSSING THE RUBICON</span></a><span style="color: red;"> (2004) makes a powerful case for the inference that Bush had placed Cheney in control of the 9/11 attack. While Henry Kissinger’s appointment as Executive Director was thwarted, that of Philip Zelikow was not, even though his self-described area of expertise is neither science nor history but the creation and maintenance of </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Philip_D._Zelikow&oldid=56836687" style="color: red;">public myths.</a><span style="color: red;"> (Since these entries are subject to alteration, I have archved </span><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title-Philip_D._Zelikow&oldid=56836687" style="color: red;">the original</a><span style="color: red;"> to which I refer here.)</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">He thus appears to have been perfect for the task he was assigned, since THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT (2004) has been<a href="http://twilightpinces.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=46"><span style="color: #0d14e7; text-decoration: none;"></span></a> <a href="http://twilightpines.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17&Itemid=46">refuted</a> on virtually very significant count. The buildings were designed to withstand even multiple impacts of commercial aircraft, the fires burned neither long enough nor hot enough to cause the steel to weaken, much less melt. The towers were destroyed from the top down, largely turned into very fine dust in just 10 seconds apiece, which is nearly the speed of free fall, even though, from the 80th floor down in the South Tower and the 96th in the North, they were both stone cold steel. The method by means of which this was done remains a matter of intense debate, but there are indications that, among other means, <a href="http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">explosives and incendiary devices</span></a> were employed. Public discussion of 9/11 is something they desperately want to suppress, since it has been the justification for the “War on Terror”, including the attacks upon Iraq and Afghanistan, restrictions upon civil liberties, and all the rest.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<b><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Where Things Stand</span></span></span></b><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">Use of plane crashes to take out your political opponents offers a virtually “fool proof” method. Unless the Attorney General declares a crash site to be a crime scene, the NTSB is restricted to the investigation of only accident-compatible alternatives, such as that the plane, the pilots, or the weather were responsible for the crash. Indeed, an even more peculiar policy of the NSTB is that its “official reports” are not admissible evidence in courts of law [49 USC 1441(e)]. The procedure, therefore, is simple. Take out your opponent using a plane crash, have a complicit or compliant Attorney General decline to declare it a “crime scene”, and the only recourse for the NTSB is to investigate it as an accident. That is what happened in the case of Paul Wellstone and will undoubtedly be followed in the case of Beverly Eckert. If Ruppert is right—and I believe that he is—then the murder of 50 more Americans to protect himself would have been “small potatoes” for Cheney.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;">While the evidence concerning Wellstone establishes his death as an assassination beyond a reasonable doubt, the same cannot yet be said about Eckert. There are <a href="http://forums.myspace.com/t/4387562.aspx?fuseaction=forums.viewthread"><span style="color: #4d2088; text-decoration: none;">reports</span></a> that she was heading on to Chicago to meet with Federal Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald with new evidence related to 9/11 and that Russian satellites detected (what is described as) a “low level” electromagnetic pulse emanating from an area near the eastern part of Lake Erie shortly before the plane plunged to the ground. <span style="color: red;">The probability that a reliable airplane with qualified pilots would lose its capacity to communicate and fall to the ground absent a precipitating cause appears to be negligible. Indeed, the recent death via plane crash of </span><a href="http://freepress.org/departments/display/19/2008/3320" style="color: red;">Mike Connell</a><span style="color: red;">, an IT wizard who appears to have been in a position to have stolen elections for Bush, occurred at a time the attorneys who were deposing him thought he was about to “spill the beans”.</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: 10pt;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="color: red;">Even though this assassination unit does not appear to have originated with Cheney, it appears all too probable that these groups or sub-units within it have been the cover for “wet work”, including assassinations and unofficial acts of terrorism, since their inception.</span> In the case of Senator Paul Wellstone, no alternative to assassination can explain the evidence. In the case of Cpl. Pat Tillman the only alternative would appear to be that the Army, knowing he had been killed by "friendly fire", wanted to capitalize upon his death for the sake of recruiting, a motive that can be subsumed by the assassination alternative. The phrase "friendly fire" is a euphemism for "an American soldier", who appears to have committed this killing. <span style="color: red;">I expect additional evidence to clarify the death of the 9/11 activist Beverly Eckert, but there is a discernable pattern here. In relation to the question with which we began, therefore, “Has Cheney been murdering Americans?”, the research I have reviewed suggests that the answer, alas!, appears to be an unequivocal “Yes!”</span></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"> </span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: Verdana; font-size: x-small;"><br />
Author's Website: www.d.umn.edu/~jfetzer/<br />
<br />
Author's Bio: McKnight Professor Emeritus, University of Minnesota, Duluth; Founder, Scholars for 9/11 Truth; Editor, Assassination Research. </span></span><br />
<div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-37244043033581121352009-05-02T18:01:00.000+04:002009-05-02T18:01:38.877+04:00Was McConnel's Plane Crash and Accident<b><i><span style="color: #274e13;">....or did Cheney's hit squads have something to do with it? </span></i></b><br />
<br />
<b>Shannon Connell of Madison says her brother Michael rarely talked about work. She knew he ran an Ohio company called New Media Communications that set up websites for Republicans including former President George H.W. Bush and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush. But it wasn't until after he died last December, when the small plane he was piloting crashed, that she learned via the Internet of his tie to a voter fraud case and to allegations that presidential adviser Karl Rove had made threats against him. </b><br />
<br />
"At first, it was really hard for me to believe Mike was dead because somebody wanted him dead," says Shannon, a buyer for a local children's resale shop. "But as time goes on, it's hard for me <i>not</i> to believe there was something deliberate about it." <br />
<br />
A native of Illinois, Shannon moved to Madison in 2002, the same year as her sister, Mary Jo Walker. Walker, a former Dane County Humane Society employee, has similar concerns about their brother's death: "It doesn't seem right to me at all." <br />
<br />
Michael Connell — who died at age 45, leaving a wife and four kids — was a computer networking expert who lived near Akron. Last July 17, an attorney who's filed a federal civil rights lawsuit alleging a conspiracy to rig elections in Ohio held a press conference at which he identified Connell as a principal witness. <br />
<br />
The attorney, Cliff Arnebeck of Columbus, Ohio, tells <i>Isthmus</i> he doesn't believe Connell was engaged in criminal activity but may have been a "data-processing implementer" for those who were. "I was told he was at the table when some criminal things were discussed." <br />
<br />
<span style="color: red;">A week after the press conference, on July 24, Arnebeck </span><a href="http://www.oregonvrc.org/2008/12/election_attorney_arnabeck_sent_email_mukasey_july_warning_threat_against_connell" style="color: red;">wrote U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey</a> seeking protection for Connell, whom he said had been "threatened" by Rove, a key player in the campaigns of George W. Bush. Arenebeck says Connell was told through an intermediary that unless he agreed to "take the fall" for election fraud in Ohio, his wife [and New Media partner] faced prosecution for lobby law violations. There was no claim of a threat on Connell's person. <br />
<br />
Arnebeck was permitted to depose Connell last Nov. 3. The portion of this deposition that dealt with the alleged threats was sealed, but Arnebeck is preparing a motion to make it all public. He affirms that Connell denied any involvement in voter fraud, but thinks Rove still had reason to regard him as a threat. <br />
<br />
"The problem that Mike Connell represented is [he was] a guy of conscience," says Arnebeck. "If it came right down to it, he would not commit perjury." Arnebeck "absolutely" would have called Connell as a witness in his lawsuit. <br />
<br />
Shannon and Mary Jo both say their brother, a devout Catholic, seemed upset in the weeks before his death. Mary Jo feels he was "stressed out and depressed" on his birthday last November; Shannon says he atypically did not respond to an email she'd sent. <br />
<br />
On Dec. 19, Connell flew alone in his single-engine Piper Supercub from a small airport near Washington, D.C. The plane crashed on its final approach to his hometown Akron-Canton Airport, between two houses. The cause is still under investigation but is presumed accidental. <br />
<br />
The blogosphere refuses to accept this. "Mike was getting ready to talk," <a href="http://www.atlargely.com/2008/12/one-of-my-sources-died-in-a-plane-crash-last-night.html">writes one online journalist</a> who labels Connell a source. "He was frightened." <br />
<br />
Connell's widow has rejected such speculation. "He wasn't about to talk, because there was nothing to talk about," Heather Connell told the <a href="http://www.atlargely.com/2008/12/one-of-my-sources-died-in-a-plane-crash-last-night.html"><i>Huffington Post</i></a>. "Nobody did anything wrong." <br />
<br />
Shannon Connell, for her part, dismisses <a href="http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4158.shtml">reports</a> that her brother was warned not to fly, but still considers the crash that killed him "very suspicious." Michael was an experienced pilot, and his plane had recently been serviced. Plus there's the timing — "after the deposition and before the trial. It just seems very convenient." <br />
Arnebeck goes further in suggesting foul play. "I have been told by multiple sources," he says, "that this plane crash was not an accident, and by multiple sources that the technology is available to bring down a plane in this way." <br />
<br />
What's his evidence? Arnebeck repeatedly cites a <a href="http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Has-Cheney-been-Murdering-by-Jim-Fetzer-090408-987.html">recent online article</a> by Minnesota emeritus professor Jim Fetzer. The article, datelined Madison and headlined "Has Cheney Been Murdering Americans?", mentions Connell along with other possible victims, including Sen. Paul Wellstone and Pat Tillman, the former NFL player killed in Afghanistan. <br />
<br />
Michael Connell's sisters don't know what to believe. Says Shannon, "I really just want the truth to come out." So does Mary Jo, who doubts this will happen: "With so many things that people in power get away with in this country, I don't expect anyone to ever be named, much less prosecuted, in the death of my brother." <br />
<br />
Links to referenced articles:<br />
<br />
<ul><li><a href="http://www.atlargely.com/2008/12/one-of-my-sources-died-in-a-plane-crash-last-night.html">"One of My Sources Died in a Plane Crash Last Night..."</a> by Larisa Alexandrovna, 12/20/08</li>
<li><a href="http://www.oregonvrc.org/2008/12/election_attorney_arnabeck_sent_email_muka" sey_july_warning_threat_against_connell="">Election Attorney Arnebeck Sent E-mail to Mukasey in July Warning of Threat Against Connell</a> by Oregon Voter Rights Coalition, 12/22/08.</li>
<li><a href="http://www.onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_4158.shtml">"Mike Connell Was Warned Not to Fly Before Crash"</a> by Wayne Madsen, <i>Online Journal</i>, 12/22/2008</li>
<li><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/12/25/the-intriguing-death-of-t_n_153518.html">"The Intriguing Death of Top GOP Consultant Michael Connell"</a> by Thomas B. Edsall, <i>Huffington Post</i>, 1/25/09</li>
<li><a href="http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/Has-Cheney-been-Murdering-by-Jim-Fetzer-090408-987.html">"Has Cheney Been Murdering Americans?"</a> by Jim Fetzer, OpEdNews, April 12, 2009</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Connell">Wikipedia entry on Michael Connell</a></li>
</ul><div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-45447804628199311442009-05-01T22:30:00.000+04:002009-05-01T22:30:57.783+04:00Did the NYT Help Bush Win the 2004 Election by Sitting on the Illegal NSA Wiretapping Story at the Request of Jane Harman?<b style="color: #274e13;">OMG! </b><br />
<h1 class="title"></h1><span class="submitted">Submitted by christine on Thu, 04/30/2009 - 11:48am.</span> <span class="taxonomy"><ul class="links inline"><li class="first last taxonomy_term_2"><a class="taxonomy_term_2" href="http://blog.buzzflash.com/analysis" rel="tag" title="">Analysis</a></li>
</ul></span> A BUZZFLASH NEWS ANALYSIS<br />
by Christine Bowman<br />
<br />
<i>A Disturbing Picture Emerges If You Connect the Dots: Rep. Jane Harman's Israeli-Spy Wiretap Story Ties-in with NYT's More Than Year-Long Delay in Breaking the Warrantless Wiretap Domestic Spying Story. <br />
</i><br />
<br />
Maybe the details of the Jane Harman/AIPAC wiretapping story are too overwhelming for many political observers to wrap their heads around. Okay. <a href="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/04/the_harman-aipac_story_a_timeline.php" target="_blank">TPM Muckraker</a> and <a href="http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=hsnews-000003098436" target="_blank">CQ Politics</a> and <a href="http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=225894&title=your-government-not-at-work" target="_blank">The Daily Show</a> and <a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/04/20/harman/" target="_blank">Salon</a> and <a href="http://www.wowowow.com/politics/bush-administration-acted-harmans-behald-wiretap-scandal-276548" target="_blank">others</a> have done a good job of presenting the basic outlines of the Harman story, for anyone who missed it or wants to bone up on the details. Suffice it to say, the complex plot would translate beautifully into a big-screen, film-noir thriller. One to rival <a href="http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074119/&ei=EBH6SbDdKJjKMNibwcAE&sa=X&oi=spellmeleon_result&resnum=1&ct=result&usg=AFQjCNGe3JIajzUMG5ex1lFsGFqdhVHrxA" target="_blank">"All the President's Men,"</a> in fact.<br />
<br />
But step back from the enigmatic, five-year-long whodunit of twists and turns and accusations, and what is the big picture? Try this theory on for size: The conscious manipulation by powerful forces of the American democratic process and the outright throwing of a presidential election. (Just a theory.)<br />
<br />
The key points to focus on are that it seems like the nation's arguably top news publisher (The New York Times) was swayed by the nation's arguably top Executive Branch attorney (Alberto Gonzales) and a self-serving, duly elected Congresswoman sitting on the House Intelligence Committee (CA Rep. Jane Harman) to cover up a program of illegal government spying on US citizens -- on the eve of an incredibly close presidential election. Are you paying attention yet?<br />
<br />
In the Fall of 2004, prior to the November 2 presidential election, The New York Times knew about the Bush Administration's new warrantless domestic wiretapping program, thanks to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/16/politics/16program.html" target="_blank">hard investigative work by their crack reporters</a>. Yet the paper's Washington bureau chief and executive editor kept that information to themselves for well over a year -- sitting on the story until December 16, 2005.<br />
<br />
What if they had not done that? The <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2004" target="_blank">vote count in Ohio</a>, just to pick one very critical state in the 2004 presidential election, was very close, with allegations of many irregularities, to boot. (Iowa and New Mexico were even closer.) If The Times had let voters know -- as soon as they themselves knew -- that the Bush Administration had an ongoing program of intercepting American citizens' domestic emails and phone calls, without FISA approval, wouldn't a good many more voters have pulled the lever for Democrat John Kerry? Almost certainly, some lower level Democratic candidates would have benefited from the release of that news, too.<br />
<br />
But the top management of The Times decided not to let voters have that knowledge. It was top management's judgment that such news was "not fit to print," to reference the paper's classic slogan.<br />
Here's a partial synopsis of the quashing of that huge story -- which was about the Executive Branch ignoring the US Constitution's Fourth Amendment guarantee of privacy rights -- as reported by <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/us/politics/24harman.html?ref=fp3" target="_blank">The Times on April 23, 2009</a>:<br />
<div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">Ms. Harman had weighed in beginning in 2004 in urging The Times not to publish an article about the secret surveillance program.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">Bill Keller, the executive editor of The Times, said in a statement this week that Ms. Harman spoke with Philip Taubman, then the newspaper’s Washington bureau chief, in October or November 2004, urging that the article not be published.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">One former official said Thursday that <a href="http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/h/michael_v_hayden/index.html?inline=nyt-per" title="More articles about Michael V. Hayden.">Michael V. Hayden</a>, then the director of the security agency, and John E. McLaughlin, then the acting director of the C.I.A., prepared talking points for Ms. Harman to use in her discussion with Mr. Taubman.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">Ms. Harman’s spokesman said she “has absolutely no recollection of any talking points for a phone call that took place five years ago.”</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">Mr. Keller said Ms. Harman had told Mr. Taubman that she was calling at the request of Mr. Hayden.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">Mr. Keller added that Ms. Harman had not spoken with him and that he did not remember her position’s being “a significant factor” in his decision not to publish the article at the time. The article was published in December 2005.</div><br />
It's interesting to note that, when urging The Times in 2004 not to break the domestic spying story, Harman was doing the bidding of the heads of the NSA and the CIA. Interesting, too, that The Times still, to this day, has not published the exact date of Harman's (or anyone else's) intervention. Nor have they quoted Taubman on what was said or how the quashing went forward.<br />
<br />
Furthermore, the newspaper's latest 2009 account of that intervention makes no reference to the hotly contested national election that was then the top news-making event in America. That aspect was addressed, but only up to a point, by <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/13/opinion/13pubed.html?_r=2&hp=&pagewanted=all" target="_blank">the paper's public editor, Byron Calame, on August 13, 2006</a>:<br />
<div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">Internal discussions about drafts of the article had been “dragging on for weeks” before the Nov. 2 election, Mr. Keller acknowledged. That process had included talks with the Bush administration. He said a fresh draft was the subject of internal deliberations “less than a week” before the election.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">“The climactic discussion about whether to publish was right on the eve of the election,” Mr. Keller said. The pre-election discussions included Jill Abramson, a managing editor; Philip Taubman, the chief of the Washington bureau; Rebecca Corbett, the editor handling the story, and often Mr. Risen. Arthur Sulzberger Jr., the publisher, was briefed, but Mr. Keller said the final decision to hold the story was his.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">... Holding a fresh draft of the story just days before the election also was an issue of fairness, Mr. Keller said. I agree that candidates affected by a negative article deserve to have time — several days to a week — to get their response disseminated before voters head to the polls.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">... Were the wording and the sensitivity of the election-day timing issue discussed internally? “I don’t remember,” Mr. Keller said in an interview.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">... Given the importance of this otherwise outstanding article on warrantless eavesdropping — and now the confirmation of pre-election decisions to delay publication — The Times owes it to readers to set the official record straight.</div><br />
There's more in the public editor's 2006 column to suggest that Keller carefully parsed his words, at a minimum, and avoided coming clean about the events surrounding the timing of the release of the story. In 2009, Keller again remains circumspect, to put it generously. First he <a href="http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/political-media/new-york-times-denies-harman-helped-persuade-bill-keller-to-hold-wiretapping-story/" target="_blank">released a statement to Greg Sargent at the Plumline</a> saying, "Ms. Harman did not influence my decision. I don’t recall that she even spoke to me." A few days later, in his statement published in The Times, he says that Harman didn't speak to him, but did speak to the DC bureau chief. So much for "I don't recall ..."<br />
<br />
Is The New York Times ready to update the "official record" now that their spiking of this bombshell of a story has repercussions for a story of congressional corruption and international spying? Can the Public Editor tell us exactly when Jane Harman talked to the DC bureau chief?<br />
<br />
It does not seem insignificant either that, later, when Attorney General Alberto Gonzales learned (presumably from Keller?) that The Times was finally going to release their report on domestic spying, he stepped in to block a nascent probe of Rep. Harman and AIPAC and alleged Israeli spying -- because he "needed Jane" to help deflect criticism of the domestic spying program:<br />
<div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">But according to the two former national security officials, Gonzales said he “needed Jane” to help support the administration’s warrantless wiretapping program, which was about to be exposed by the Times. Harman, he told Goss, had helped persuade the newspaper to hold the wiretap story on the eve of the 2004 elections. And although it was too late to stop the Times from publishing now, she could be counted on again to help defend the program."</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"><a href="http://www.cqpolitics.com/frame-templates/print_template.html" target="_blank">http://www.cqpolitics.com/frame...</a></div><br />
And the investigation of Harman was dropped like a hot potato. Its existence only became public this month.<br />
Since major players in this game of intrigue -- most notably Gonzales, but also Harman now -- have acquired the stench of corruption about them, is it reasonable to assume that The New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller has nothing to hide, and nothing to apologize for? His way of addressing the questions raised by his own public editor three years back <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/01/opinion/01publiceditor.html?pagewanted=all" target="_blank">and in an earlier column</a> does not instill confidence. A few more excerpts:<br />
<div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">"I don't remember."</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">The eavesdropping information "first became known to Times reporters" a year ago, he said.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">[then] "... more than a year ago ..."</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">Mr. Keller declined to explain in detail his pre-election decision to hold the article, citing obligations to preserve the confidentiality of sources.</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">“Whether publishing earlier would have influenced the 2004 election is, I think, hard to say. Judging from the public reaction to the N.S.A. eavesdropping reflected in various polls, one could ask whether earlier disclosure might have helped President Bush more than hurt.”</div><div style="padding-left: 30px;"></div><div style="padding-left: 30px;">“... old business ...”</div><br />
Like it or not, this story is now about a media big shot who helped top government officials hide the fact that they had been spying on citizens without judicial oversight. It's also about a powerful media figure or figures who hid a dubious activity by GOP and White House insiders from voters on the eve of a very important and close election -- even while recognizing that their decision would likely change votes. Why did they do that?<br />
Echoes of <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sourcewatch.org%2Findex.php%3Ftitle%3DWatergate&ei=Xxn6Sd-TNaHOMvzRncsE&usg=AFQjCNEiuHm-k3vqfXZlNPjLK_zRiVWE6A" target="_blank">Watergate</a>? Well, at least in that little caper, the media were the good guys. Seems like The New York Times still has more explaining to do.<br />
<br />
<div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-47401143930674901442009-05-01T21:38:00.000+04:002009-05-01T21:38:03.338+04:00What Should Obama Do?<div class="print_consortiumnews"></div><div class="print_title"><span class="article_title"><br />
</span></div><div class="print_author_date">By Melvin A. Goodman <br />
April 26, 2009</div><div class="article_main_text"></div><div class="article_main_text"><strong>E<strong>ditor’s Note: Almost by their nature, Democratic politicians look for bipartisan compromises and try to avoid nasty confrontations. But there are times when legal and moral imperatives demand courage, truth and clarity.</strong></strong></div><div class="article_main_text"></div><div class="article_main_text"><strong><strong>In this guest essay, former CIA analyst Melvin A. Goodman says President Barack Obama finds himself in one of those moments:</strong></strong></div><div class="print_title"></div><div class="print_title"><span class="article_lead_paragraph">President Obama is displaying ambivalence in handling the issue of torture and abuse. He clearly wants to do the right thing and, as a result, has put a stop to torture and closed down the CIA’s secret prisons where the worst abuses occurred.</span></div><div class="article_main_text"></div><div class="article_main_text">As a political leader with an extensive policy agenda, however, he wants to limit the investigation of the crimes that were committed in order to avoid a fractious political fight that could compromise his agenda. <br />
<br />
The fact is that U.S. and international laws were broken and immoral actions were conducted. Moral and legal issues, unlike political ones, should not be compromised. Pursuing the proper moral course, as opposed to the political course, is central to the identity of President Obama as a leader and to the United States as a nation. <br />
<br />
As a result, he must deal decisively with the Bush administration’s use of torture, secret prisons and extraordinary renditions.</div><div class="article_main_text"></div><div class="article_main_text">The citizens of the United States, indeed the entire international community, know that war crimes were committed and that domestic and international laws were broken. Acts of sadism were committed — not only against those responsible for terrorist activities, but also against innocent victims. </div><div class="article_main_text"></div><div class="article_main_text">We need to establish that these activities were wrong and will never be repeated.<br />
<br />
Only a serious high-level investigation can achieve these objectives. The investigation must focus on the senior officials of the Bush administration who were responsible for this descent into depravity, but there are individuals serving in high-level positions at the CIA, including the deputy director and the acting general counsel, who must be replaced if there is to be a convincing repudiation of the abuses of the past eight years.</div><div class="article_main_text"> CIA officials sought protection from the Justice Department because they knew their actions violated international law (the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture); U.S. law (which treats any breach of Geneva as a crime); and the 8th amendment to the Constitution.<br />
<br />
President Obama has given senior CIA officials too much say with respect to releasing documents and limiting both congressional inquiry and the appointment of a special prosecutor. </div><div class="article_main_text"> Senior CIA officials, past and present, are making a case that is patently false. They have told the President that an investigation will harm the CIA and that operations officers will be less willing to take risks in the future if some of them are held accountable now.<br />
<br />
President Obama must understand that very few CIA officers were involved in these crimes; that the overwhelming majority of National Clandestine Service officers are professionals who understand the need to combat terrorism and are committed to supporting their President and defending their nation’s security.</div><div class="article_main_text"> The overwhelming majority of NCS officers was not involved in the illegal activities and did not support them.<br />
<br />
The current CIA leadership has argued falsely that foreign intelligence services will be less willing to share secrets with the United States if we pursue an investigation of these criminal activities. In fact, it was the Bush administration’s resort to torture, abuse, and secret prisons that led many nations to withhold information from the United States.</div><div class="article_main_text"> CIA leaders believe that past investigations of CIA scandals, such as attempts to conduct political assassinations, had a chilling effect on CIA morale. <br />
<br />
This is also untrue! CIA director William Colby’s cooperation in the 1970s with a Senate investigation of CIA assassination plots brought an end to these counterproductive actions, and CIA director John Deutch’s limits in the 1990s on the recruitment of Central American agents linked to death squads in their countries led to more effective recruitment.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately, President Obama has made the journey toward an investigation more difficult by appointing former CIA veteran John Brennan as an intelligence adviser. </div><div class="article_main_text"> Brennan was a major player in the era of cover-up at the CIA, serving as an executive assistant to CIA Director George Tenet when the practices of detention and torture were introduced. He was a cheerleader in selling renditions and secret prisons to the media, and he lobbied against release of any torture memoranda. He has a personal interest in perpetuating the cover-up of CIA’s rendition and detention practices.<br />
<br />
Leon Panetta’s appointment as Director of Central Intelligence has proved a major disappointment. He has accepted the position being advanced by those Agency officers seeking to cover up the abuses of the past eight years.</div><div class="article_main_text"> He has retained Steven Kappes as CIA deputy director, although Kappes was one of the ideological drivers for these practices. He has retained John Rizzo as acting general counsel, although Rizzo was a key figure in the Agency’s lobbying for Justice Department protection for its policies for nearly a decade; the Senate intelligence committee refused to confirm Rizzo as general counsel for that reason. <br />
<br />
Panetta also has not named a new Inspector General for the CIA, raising the question of whether he shares the preference of former DCI Hayden and Deputy DCI Kappes for a weakened Office of Inspector General.</div><div class="article_main_text"> Presumably, Hayden and Kappes prefer a weak OIG because that office is the only institution to have conducted a critical investigation of the Agency’s torture practices (2004); they surely seek to prevent any further such investigations by the IG.</div><div class="article_main_text"></div><div class="article_main_text">President Obama and Senator Dianne Feinstein, D-California, should be deeply concerned that there is not a statutory and independent individual serving as Inspector General of the CIA at this delicate juncture.<br />
<br />
<strong>What Needs to Be Done?</strong><br />
<br />
The Obama administration must stop coddling those CIA leaders who continue to try to cover up Agency actions against the best interests of the Agency itself. It is time to uncover, understand, and reject the painful truths about CIA’s use of torture and abuse. <br />
<br />
The release of the memoranda by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel has begun the process of open disclosure, but President Obama must continue that process.</div><div class="article_main_text"> He cannot expect the Senate and House intelligence committees to do a rigorous investigation because too many congressional leaders, including Jay Rockefeller, Nancy Pelosi, Peter Hoekstra and Richard Shelby, knew about the practices of torture and abuse and did nothing to challenge, let alone prevent, them. <br />
<br />
He must appoint a special prosecutor, perhaps John Dunlop, who has been investigating for months the CIA’s destruction of the torture tapes, which now appears to have a blatant act of obstructed justice. </div><div class="article_main_text"> President Obama has ruled out the type of commission that investigated 9/11, but Pandora’s box has been opened and he will have to create or turn to some institution to confront the truths that have been unleashed.</div><div class="article_main_text"> There is no perfect institution, but he must choose one — congressional, blue-ribbon, special investigator, Inspector General. Otherwise the President will continue to be hung up by an inability to confront the very real moral challenges posed by this country’s use of torture and abuse.<br />
<br />
It is time to recognize that the policy of torture and abuse was only one of many steps taken by President Bush and Vice President Cheney to expand and abuse presidential powers. </div><div class="article_main_text"> The Bush administration was responsible for warrantless eavesdropping in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978; the Terrorist Surveillance Program in violation of the National Security Act of 1947; more presidential signing statements than all previous presidents signed in order to undermine the will of the people; and the outing of CIA clandestine operative Valerie Plame in violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982.</div><div class="article_main_text"> The Obama administration may not have the time and energy to address all of these abuses, but the program of torture and abuse was by far the worst of these; it must be repudiated. </div><div class="article_main_text"><strong>Melvin A. Goodman, a regular contributor to <a href="http://www.pubrecord.org/">The Public Record</a> where this essay first appeared, is senior fellow at the <a href="http://www.ciponline.org/">Center for International Policy</a> and adjunct professor of government at Johns Hopkins University. He spent more than 42 years in the U.S. Army, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Department of Defense. His most recent book is<em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Failure-Intelligence-Decline-Fall-CIA/dp/0742551105/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236824645&sr=8-1"> Failure of Intelligence: The Decline and Fall of the CIA</a></em>.</strong></div><div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-33639706432550524442009-04-30T03:52:00.000+04:002009-04-30T03:52:36.415+04:00The News<ul class="posts"><li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/hannitys-waterboarding-distraction.html">Hannity's Waterboarding Distraction Trivializes To...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/about-torture-myths-and-reality.html">About Torture, the myths and reality</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/cheneys-disinformation-on-torture.html">Cheney's Disinformation On Torture</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/arlen-joins-democrats.html">Arlen Joins The Democrats</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/real-reason-for-torture.html">The real reason for torture</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/thompson-secession-wrong-play-for-gop.html">Thompson: Secession wrong play for GOP</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/zelikow-bush-torture-memo-dissenter.html">Zelikow, Bush Torture Memo Dissenter</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/why-bush-torture-architects-must-be.html">Why the Bush torture architects must be prosecuted...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/msnbccom-video-player.html">msnbc.com Video Player</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/official-version-of-911-questioned-zero.html">The official version of 9/11 questioned + Zero An ...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/ralph-nader-on-alex-jones-show.html">Ralph Nader on The Alex Jones Show: Investigate 9/...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/lbj-accused-nixon-of-treason-from-nixon.html">LBJ accused Nixon of treason + From Nixon to 9/11</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/paying-attention-to-911-related.html">Paying Attention to 9/11 Related Alternative News</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/911-flight-77-phone-call-lies.html">9/11 FLIGHT 77 PHONE CALL LIES</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/is-obama-willing-to-become-conspirator.html">Is Obama Willing To Become A Conspirator After the...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/thank-you-spain.html">Thank You, Spain!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/teabaggers-turn-off-independents.html">Teabaggers turn off Independents</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/republican-learning-curve.html">Republican Learning Curve....</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/right-wing-extremist-on-rise-in-amarica.html">Right Wing Extremist On the Rise In Amarica</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/senate-report-finds-rumsfeld-directly.html">Senate Report Finds Rumsfeld Directly Responsible ...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/maddow-cia-report-describes-torture-at.html">Maddow: CIA report describes torture at 'black sit...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/bush-torture-story-is-not-over.html">The Bush Torture Story Is Not Over!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/limbaugh-laughs-at-torture.html">Limbaugh Laughs at Torture</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/voices-georgia-passes-law-honoring.html">VOICES: Georgia passes law honoring terrorists and...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/cia-memos-could-bring-more-disclosures.html">C.I.A. Memos Could Bring More Disclosures</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/maj-general-calls-foriinvestigation.html">Maj. General Calls forIinvestigation</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/ok-finnaly-torture-memos.html">OK, finnaly, the torture memos</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/right-wingers-are-desperately-trying-to.html">Right-Wingers Are Desperately Trying to Destroy Ob...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/so-say-people.html">So Say The People!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/krugman-on-chambliss-hypocrisy.html">Krugman on the Chambliss Hypocrisy</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/50-rise-in-hate-groups.html">50% rise in hate groups</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/countdown-teabagging-hype.html">Countdown: Teabagging hype</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/cnn-roesgen-grills-tea-party-protestor.html">CNN's Roesgen grills tea party protestor who calls...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/obama.html">Obama a 'fascist'?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/obama-publishes-torture-memos.html">Obama publishes 'torture' memos</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/anatomy-of-bushs-torture-paradigm.html">Anatomy of Bush's Torture 'Paradigm'</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/its-not-just-paul-krugman-anymore.html">It’s not just Paul Krugman anymore.</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/us-news-media-fails-america-again.html">US News Media Fails America, Again</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/glenn-beck-praises-texas-secessionists.html">Glenn Beck Praises Texas Secessionists As Patriots...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/this-and-thatnews.html">This and That....NEWS</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/nyt-report-national-security-agency.html">NYT report: National Security Agency tried to spy ...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/all-we-will-say-about-this-silliness.html">All We Will Say About This Silliness.</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/fox-reporter-contradicts-fox.html">Fox Reporter Contradicts Fox:</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/note-bene-for-13-april-2009.html">Note Bene for 13 April 2009</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/endgame-for-gramm.html">Endgame for Gramm?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/limbaughs-dirty-little-secret-of-radio.html">Limbaugh's Dirty Little Secret of Radio "Success"</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/aclu-mentally-ill-suffer-abuse-in-los.html">ACLU: Mentally Ill Suffer Abuse in Los Angeles Cou...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/american-soldiers-loot-recon-funds-from.html">American Soldiers loot Recon, Funds From Iraq</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/republican-party-study-in-comedic.html">The Republican Party: A study in comedic uselessne...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/glenn-beck-apocalypse-supernews.html">The Glenn Beck Apocalypse: Supernews!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/tea-party-brigade.html">The Tea Party Brigade:</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/differing-views-of-rule-of-law-in-spain.html">The differing views of the "rule of law" in Spain ...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/glenn-becks-slide-into-insanity.html">Glenn Becks Slide Into Insanity</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/tarp-banks-lending-concerns-panel.html">TARP banks' lending concerns panel</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/battle-with-banks-is-on-protests-and.html">THE BATTLE WITH THE BANKS IS ON: PROTESTS AND PITC...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/fidel-and-us-why-hell-not.html">Fidel and Us: Why the hell not?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/and-we-are-supposed-ro-continue-to-live.html">And we are supposed ro continue to live together?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/we-love-biuzzflash-read-on.html">We love Buzzflash: Read ON</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/americas-imperial-wars-we-need-to-see.html">America's Imperial Wars: We Need to See the Horror...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/from-media-matters.html">From Media Matters</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/some-of-us-have-gone-mad.html">Some of us have gone mad</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/wtf-this-is-not-what-i-voted-for.html">WTF? This is not what I voted for......</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/teabag-party.html">TEABAG PARTY!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/boxer-calls-out-gop-on-reconciliation.html">Boxer Calls Out GOP On Reconciliation Hypocrisy</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/robinson-gop-just-making-stuff-up.html">Robinson: GOP Just Making Stuff Up</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/anatomy-of-right-wing-conspiracy.html">The Anatomy of a Right-Wing Conspiracy Campaign</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/wing-nut-conspiracies.html">WIng Nut Conspiracies</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/nationalize-reorganize-decentralize.html">Nationalize, Reorganize, Decentralize</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/these-people-fear-prosecution-as-well.html">These People Fear Prosecution, As Well They Should...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/doj-courts-could-harm-afghan-effort.html">DOJ: Courts could harm Afghan effort</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/obama-releases-reagan-records.html">Obama releases Reagan records</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/paranoid-republicans-are-projecting.html">Paranoid Republicans are projecting their own evil...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/wh-responds-to-cheney-criticism-guess.html">WH Responds To Cheney's Criticism: 'I Guess Rush L...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/tell-obama-to-stop-protecting-bushies.html">Tell Obama To Stop Protecting the Bushies!</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/cbo-ethanol-production-hiked-food.html">CBO: Ethanol production hiked food prices</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/look-at-right-via-rush.html">A Look At The Right VIA Rush</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/warning-to-israel.html">A Warning To Israel</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/whats-up-with-dems.html">What's Up With The Dems?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/top-25-censored-stories-for-2009.html">Top 25 Censored Stories for 2009</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/bailouts-huge-fraud.html">Bailouts, Huge Fraud.</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/red-cross-gravely-concerned-about.html">Red Cross 'gravely concerned' about detainees who ...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/in-warrantless-wiretapping-case-obama.html">In Warrantless Wiretapping Case, Obama DOJ's New A...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/tomgram-filling-skies-with-assassins.html">Tomgram: Filling the Skies with Assassins</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/fusion-center-freak-out.html">Fusion Center Freak Out:</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/murder-trumps-torture-not-so-sure.html">Murder Trumps Torture (Not so sure)</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/brain-researchers-open-door-to-editing.html">Brain Researchers Open Door to Editing Memory</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/politicizing-accounting-no-end-to-scams.html">Politicizing Accounting -- No End to the Scams</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/proposition-8-proving-ground-for-new.html">Proposition 8 : A Proving Ground For The New 'Rain...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/workers-steered-to-high-risk-investing.html">Workers steered to high-risk investing</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/holder-and-powell-aint-misbehavin.html">Holder and Powell Ain't Misbehavin'</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/end-nixons-drug-war-quagmire-will-obama.html">End Nixon's Drug War Quagmire: Will Obama Have the...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/quiet-coup.html">The Quiet Coup</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/mexican-president-us-authorities.html">Mexican president: US authorities 'complicit' in d...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/joseph-stiglitz-its-going-to-be-bad.html">Joseph Stiglitz: "It's going to be bad, very bad"</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/active-thermitic-material-discovered-in.html">Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from ...</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/truth-crimes-commissions-and-hope.html">Truth, Crimes, Commissions and Hope</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/leahy-faults-gop-partisanship-on-bush.html">Leahy Faults GOP Partisanship on Bush</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/internet-doomsday.html">Internet Doomsday?</a></li>
<li><a href="http://independentlight.blogspot.com/2009/04/sullivan-scared-cheney-puts-his-head-in.html">Sullivan: Scared Cheney puts his head in the noose...</a></li>
</ul><div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-73857788387884391062009-04-23T03:26:00.000+04:002009-04-23T03:26:00.235+04:00If It's A War Crime, It Must Be Partisan<h2 class="title"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/22/ensign-sasc-report/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to 'Ensign Calls Senate Armed Services Committee Report A ‘Democrat Partisan’ Document'">Ensign Calls Senate Armed Services Committee Report A ‘Democrat Partisan’ Document <span class="storyexpander">»</span></a></span></h2>Today, Sen. John Ensign (R-AZ) went on MSNBC to attack the <a href="http://documents.nytimes.com/report-by-the-senate-armed-services-committee-on-detainee-treatment/page/14#p=1">Senate Armed Services Committee report</a> on the <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/22/senate-torture-report/">Bush administration's treatment of detainees</a>. When host Chris Matthews asked Ensign whether he was shocked that our interrogation practices were based on those used by Chinese Communists to elicit false information from U.S. troops, the senator criticized him for being "inflammatory."<br />
<br />
When Matthews insisted that he wasn't being inflammatory because he was reading directly from the report, Ensign tried to discredit the entire document by saying it was a "Democrat partisan" report: <br />
<blockquote>ENSIGN: <b><i>Chris, the reason I said it is because you didn't preface that with saying that was a Democrat report. <strong>That was a Democrat partisan report.</strong> And you have to understand where the people who were doing that report -- where their ideology comes from. </i></b><br />
MATTHEWS: <i><strong>Well, apparently, Sen. John McCain is part of what you call a "Democrat report." It's the full committee report.</strong> ... [I]t's the Armed Services Committee report. It went through three months of review by the Defense Department, until its final release just yesterday. It seems to me this was vetted, sir. And you say this was some Democrat report.</i><br />
ENSIGN: <i>The Democrats are in control of all of the committees. This was a Democrat majority report. <strong>This was not with the participation of the minority where the minority signed it, "Yes, we agree with these views."</strong></i> </blockquote><br />
Ensign is right that there are often committee reports produced and released by only the minority or the majority. This report, however, was not one of them. The first page of the detainee report makes it clear that it is a document from the "<a href="http://documents.nytimes.com/report-by-the-senate-armed-services-committee-on-detainee-treatment/page/15#p=1">Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate</a>." ThinkProgress spoke with a committee spokesman who confirmed that the <a href="http://features.csmonitor.com/politics/2009/04/22/report-says-top-officials-set-tone-for-detainee-abuse/">full</a>, unanimous committee released the report. When talking with Levin today, MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell noted that Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham also endorsed the report. <br />
<br />
Additionally, documents clearly show that the Bush administration's interrogation program was based on the U.S. military program known as <a href="http://washingtonindependent.com/39933/report-details-origins-of-bush-era-interrogation-policies">Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape</a> (SERE), which is used to train U.S. troops if they are ever tortured by an enemy that doesn't adhere to the Geneva Conventions. As the report notes, SERE techniques "were based, in part, on Chinese Communist techniques used during the Korean War to <a href="http://documents.nytimes.com/report-by-the-senate-armed-services-committee-on-detainee-treatment/page/28#p=28">elicit false confessions</a>."<br />
<br />
Transcript: <a href="http://thinkprogress.org/2009/04/22/ensign-sasc-report/" id="open-aepnp37761" onclick="getData('37761');return false;">More »</a><br />
<div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i><br />
</i></b></span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><b><i>The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</i></b></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-30413707532316788812009-04-23T03:08:00.000+04:002009-04-23T03:08:46.770+04:00Oh, Suh-nap......Hillary!<a href="http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/" style="display: block;"> </a> <br />
<div id="content-wrapper"><div id="crosscol-wrapper" style="text-align: center;"></div><div id="main-wrapper"><div class="main section" id="main"><div class="widget Blog" id="Blog1"><div class="blog-posts hfeed"><h2 class="date-header"><span style="font-size: small;">Wednesday, April 22, 2009</span></h2><div class="post hentry"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://draft.blogger.com/post-create.do" name="8495959297442463908"></a></span> <br />
<h3 class="post-title entry-title"> <span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://thepoliticalcarnival.blogspot.com/2009/04/video-hillary-to-cheney-oh-suh-nap.html">VIDEO-- Hillary Clinton: "I don't consider Cheney a reliable source." Oh, suh-nap!</a></span> </h3><div class="post-body entry-content">By GottaLaff<br />
<div style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4MVmsjXTjN7qQgjRcFmBFAJZiLoJUIgS164KjqSKpDG4kun4uZo-S_qkLQNE5Zd37FzC-j9UpDUs7qRBdgnkL0Lpwfg0F2RgvCftAb9LKvNIFEP_rbn6OidNSu1d7sVfVz2LqoTDEIdgb/s1600-h/snap3.jpg" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5327556941314679682" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi4MVmsjXTjN7qQgjRcFmBFAJZiLoJUIgS164KjqSKpDG4kun4uZo-S_qkLQNE5Zd37FzC-j9UpDUs7qRBdgnkL0Lpwfg0F2RgvCftAb9LKvNIFEP_rbn6OidNSu1d7sVfVz2LqoTDEIdgb/s200/snap3.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; height: 88px; width: 134px;" /></a></div><span style="font-family: Georgia,"Times New Roman",serif; font-size: large;"><b>Oh, suh-nap!</b></span><br />
<br />
<object height="265" width="320"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XX_CcQthDMI&hl=en&fs=1"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XX_CcQthDMI&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="320" height="265"></object><br />
<br />
Hillary caused a little damage to the <a href="http://crooksandliars.com/2007/06/21/ovp-our-fourth-branch-of-government/">Nation of Dick</a>. </div><div class="post-body entry-content"></div><div class="post-body entry-content">Looks like <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/22/723099/-Breaking:-Hillary-hits-back-at-Cheney%21%21%21-Ouch">he just got owned by a girlie:</a><br />
<blockquote>I am watching SOS Hillary Clinton's testimony to the House Foreign Affairs committee on <a href="http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream3">CNN.com</a> whereupon some Republican congressman (Dana Rohrabacher) asked about <span style="font-weight: bold;">the wisdom in releasing the torture memos, and went on to quote Dick Cheney's statement to Fox News that torture works to keep us safe</span>. He continued with <span style="font-weight: bold;">Cheney's claim that there are memos that show that torture techniques work.</span> Hillary abruptly cut the congressman saying acerbically:<br />
<blockquote><b>"It won't surprise you that I don't consider Dick Cheney a particularly reliable source...I believe we ought to get to the bottom of this</b>" </blockquote>[...] It shut up the guy instantly.</blockquote>Here are a couple of bonus quotes, this time regarding The Marxist Commie Handshake between President Obama and Hugo Chavez:<br />
<blockquote>She just right now knocked away all that silly huffing and puffing about "<b>handshake-gate</b>." She described the book gift-giving incident as a case of Hugo Chavez camera hogging, including the way he deliberately positioned the book cover so that the title would catch the camera lens. She said:<br />
<blockquote><i>I found it all amusing...President Obama was right; <b>why should we be afraid of shaking somebody's hand</b>...Iran is seeking influence in our hemisphere...we buy their (Venezuela) oil...let's see if we can turn some of this (animosity) around... [laughter] </i></blockquote>To another "concerned Republican" about the Hugo Chavez handshake, she just said:<br />
<blockquote><i><b>8 years of isolation hasn't worked</b>. We've isolated him (Hugo Chavez), so he's gone elsewhere. <b>He's a sociable guy, so he's found the sorts of friends we don't like</b>. <span style="font-weight: bold;">Eight years of isolation hasn't worked so let's try something else. </span></i></blockquote></blockquote></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br />
<div style="color: #274e13;"></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br />
</span></div><div style="color: #274e13;"><span style="font-size: x-small;">The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6144577754099737154.post-76940966551754485102009-04-23T02:55:00.002+04:002009-04-23T03:00:58.016+04:00Dave Lindorff: Are Members of Congress (and Maybe Even the President) Being Blackmailed?<h1 class="title"><span style="font-size:100%;">We have been asking this for months</span>!<br /></h1><h1 class="title"><span style="font-size:100%;">I want to see orange Jumpsuits~!!!</span><br /></h1> <!-- begin content --> <span class="submitted"></span><span style="font-weight: bold;" class="taxonomy"><a href="http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/lindorff" rel="tag" title="Columns by Dave Lindorff">Dave Lindorff</a></span> <p><span style="font-weight: bold;">For some time now, many Americans have wondered how Congress, the elected body that the nation's Founding Fathers saw as the bulwark of liberty, could have been so thoroughly unwilling to, or incapable of challenging the dictatorial power-grabs and the eight-year Constitution wrecking campaign of the Bush/Cheney Administration. </span><br /><br />There has been speculation on both the far left and the far right, and even among some in the apolitical, cynical middle of the political spectrum, that somehow the Bush/Cheney Administration must have been blackmailing at least the key members of the Congressional leadership, most likely through the use of electronic monitoring by the National Security Agency (NSA).<br /><br />I'll admit that I considered the idea of blackmail a bit far out. But now suddenly there is at least some evidence that such seemingly wild speculation may not have been off the mark, with reports that the NSA was indeed monitoring Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA), and that the Bush Administration used the evidence it had obtained of her improper conversations with and promises to assist agents of the Israeli government and its lobby here in the U.S., the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), to blackmail her into supporting the NSA's warrantless spying program -- the very kind of spying that led to her being caught on tape plotting with an agent of a foreign power.<br /><br />At the time of the taping of Harman's incriminating phone conversations, the administration was trying desperately (and ultimately successfully) to get The New York Times to hold off on publishing a shocking investigative report by journalist James Risen about a massive campaign of warrantless tapping of Americans' phone and internet communications.<br /><br />According to a <a href="http://static.cqpolitics.com/harman-3098436-page1.html?docID=hsnews-000003098436" target="_blank">report by Jeff Stein, published in the latest issue of Congressional Quarterly</a>, the NSA in 2006 recorded Rep. Harman negotiating with an alleged Israeli agent about helping Israel win a reduction in the espionage charges filed by the U.S. in 2005 against two members of the AIPAC lobby accused of providing U.S. intelligence information to the Israeli government (the case against AIPAC's Stephen Rosen and Keith Weissman is still waiting to go to trial). According to the transcript, a copy of which was obtained by CQ, the Israeli agent offered to have AIPAC lobby, and more specifically to have a it arrange for a wealthy Jewish pro-Israel donor in California donate money to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, in order to get her, once she became House Speaker, to name Harman as chair of the House Intelligence Committee. At the end of the phone conversation, Rep. Harman, who offered to help, was heard to say, "This conversation doesn't exist."<br /><br />According to reports in CQ and in The New York Times, which ran a story on the scandal as its lead news item on Tuesday, then Attorney General Alberto Gonzales subsequently intervened with the FBI to prevent any prosecution of Harman, a key member of Congress on whom the administration was relying to help it persuade the Times to withhold its NSA wiretapping exposé until after the 2006 election. In the event, Rep. Harman did later make calls to a Times editor, the paper did hold its story until after the election, and Harman later was a leading backer of the administration's controversial (and illegal) NSA spying program. (Harman never did get the chair of the Intel Committee, though she did make a run at it.)<br /><br />There are several serious issues here. One is the extraordinary glimpse it offers into the extent to which Israel has penetrated the centers of power in Washington. It is illegal for foreign governments to directly lobby and to offer to arrange financial contributions for members of the U.S. government, but here, clearly, Israeli agents were doing just that. The role of AIPAC as a front for the Israeli government in Washington, as exposed here, is simply stomach-turning, and should make it a toxic organization to politicians. Instead, they flock en masse to its annual meetings, as President Obama did almost immediately upon winning the November election, and a large proportion of both houses from both parties happily accept its campaign largesse.<br /><br />A second, even bigger, issue is the NSA's spying activities themselves. According to CQ, the particular wiretap that caught Rep. Harman inflagrante with an Israeli agent was a court-approved tap -- part of an investigation into Israeli government spying activities. But even if this is true -- and at this point, we're relying on what the government is telling us about it -- it shows how dangerous the broader unwarranted monitoring program of the NSA has been, and remains. Back in 1978, Congress passed the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) in direct response to the disclosure during the Watergate hearings and subsequent investigations that the Nixon Administration had been using the NSA to conduct illegal monitoring of the communications of anti-war activists, and of members of Congress. To prevent such police-state outrages in the future, Congress passed the FISA legislation, establishing a secret court staffed by a panel of top security cleared federal judges, whose sole responsibility was to consider and grant requests from the NSA for warrants to conduct secret electronic surveillance within the U.S. or involving American citizens abroad.<br /><br />President Bush used the pretext of the 9-11 attacks to secretly order the NSA to begin a massive campaign of surveillance without going through the FISA Court for warrants, even secretly soliciting the cooperation of the nation's several telecom companies in splicing in routers at their switching hubs to make it possible to monitor all conversations moving across the wires and the Internet. It seemed to some observers, myself included, that the only reason the administration could have had for bypassing the FISA court (which over 30 years of operation has been incredibly accommodating of government spying requests) was that it was planning to engage in spying that would outrage the public and the Congress and even the FISA judges. </p><p>It also seemed likely, given the Bush/Cheney Administration's public stance that everyone was either "with us or against us," and that critics of the administration's "War on Terror" or of its plans to invade Iraq, were "unpatriotic" or "soft on terror," that Congressional opponents of the administration would be obvious -- and indeed irresistible -- targets of that surveillance.<br /><br />Now that we have seen proof that the administration was not above using its NSA-acquired knowledge to pressure a member of Congress, it becomes absolutely essential that Congress and the Justice Department investigate to see whether other members of Congress were also victims of agency spying, and whether others besides Rep. Harman were similarly extorted or otherwise compromised.<br /><br />The American public can, at this point, have zero confidence in the integrity of the Congress or of their own representatives, knowing that politicians and government officials may be acting not in the public interest but rather under duress in the interest of those who control the National Security Agency. We can have zero confidence either in the integrity of the president, who likewise may well have been compromised by NSA surveillance conducted on him before he became president.<br /><br />The only possible position for the public to adopt as of today is to be suspicious of any politician who opposes a full and public investigation into the NSA's seven-year-long campaign of sweeping, warrantless electronic eavesdropping, since opposition to such an investigation, in the wake of the Harman episode, could well be an indication that the political figure in question is afraid she or he has been monitored, or worse, that she or he has been threatened by those who have the records. Every citizen concerned about the fate of American democracy should demand that his or her senators and representative promptly call for such a public probe.<br /><br />It is no longer a wild idea at all to imagine that our Congress has been reduced to the status of a Potemkin legislature because of real or imagined spying by the NSA.<br /><br />DAVE LINDORFF is a Philadelphia-based journalist. His latest book is "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006). His work is available at www.thiscantbehappening.net. </p><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 102, 0);font-size:85%;" ><span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><br />(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) </span><br /><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;">The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.</span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0