Wednesday, December 21, 2005

12 Days of Justice - Day 5

So far in the 12 Days of Justice daily series you have learned that:



Todays diary for Day 5 will be a short and to the point explanation of Judge Alito's views concerning women and abortion rights. It will deal with his radical and demeaning views from the perspective of his positions revealed in certain abortion cases, memos, applications, and discussions of Roe v Wade.


[Updated]: to reflect many edits! Please check the bottom to cross-post easily.


Join me in the back alley to get a clear view of Alito.

In 1985 Alito made crystal clear his position concerning Roe v Wade.


Alito's name does not appear on any briefs the Reagan Solicitor General's office filed in abortion-related cases. However, just a few months before Alito wrote his DOJ application letter touting his contribution to cases in which the government argued that "the Constitution does not protect a right to an abortion," the Solicitor General's office had filed a brief in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists on that very subject. The brief urged that "this Court should overrule" Roe v. Wade. The Court rejected the Solicitor General's arguments, with only two justices agreeing that Roe should be overturned.


T. R. Goldman at law.com Offers this opinion of the upcoming battle:


If Alito's jurisprudential views match those on the Thornburgh brief -- and at least in 1985, Alito indicated that they do -- then the job application provides the Judiciary Committee with the type of window into a future justice's thinking that, since the failed nomination of Robert Bork, has become almost nonexistent.


This is a nomination demanding to be "Borked" into nonexistence. But this still does not give a clear picture of his views on women's rights. Please consider taking and using any or all parts of the following letter and using it to contact your Senators concerning this nomination. Feel free to adapt and edit this letter, or you can just say how you feel about this in your own words. All we ask is that you take action before it is too late.





What does Samuel Alito think about women and abortion rights?


In Judge Alito's 1992 dissent in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, Alito argued that a law requiring a woman in certain circumstances to notify her spouse before seeking an abortion did not pose an undue burden on a woman's right to choose. Alito asserted that if parental notification requirements were constitutional, as the Supreme Court had previously held, then spousal notification requirements must be permissible as well. (Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 947 F.2d 682 (3d Cir. 1991), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 505 U.S. 833 (1992).)


Alito's colleagues on the Third Circuit and a 5-4 Supreme Court majority disagreed. Writing for that Supreme Court majority, Sandra Day O'Connor firmly rejected Alito's troubling logic:


"A State may not give to a man the kind of dominion over his wife that parents exercise over their children."

(Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) at 898.)


Sandra Day O'Connor was correct in rejecting Alito's view of women as subservient to men and less than equal in the eyes of the law.


In a 1985 memo Alito had advised the Reagan Administration that it should attempt to undermine Roe v. Wade. Alito urged the administration to file a friend-of-the-court brief in Thornburgh v. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and argued that this brief could promote "the goals of bringing about the eventual overturning of Roe v. Wade, and in the meantime, of mitigating its effects."


Alito wanted the administration to "make clear" that it "disagree[d] with Roe v. Wade," but argued that the most effective long-term strategy of persuading the Supreme Court to overturn this groundbreaking precedent was to chip away at it slowly through extremely restrictive state laws. Overturning Roe v Wade would most certainly result in a return to the days of dangerous "illegal" abortions.


Is this the kind of nomination that sounds like a moderate? This candidate is not representative of my views, nor of mainstream America.


Alito clearly has no problem with forcing his radical ideals on women.


I strongly urge you to vote against this horrible nomination because no woman should be forced by anyone to have to resort to using a coat hanger to perform a back alley abortion. When you consider that Alito's warped views would be replacing the moderate voice of Sandra Day O'Connor there should be no doubt that Alito's nomination must be stopped.


Signed,





Some suggested contacts and petitions:


Your senators


The Judiciary Committee


Your representatives


Congress.org


Campus Progress "Stop Alito's America"


PFAW "Save the Court"


Planned Parenthood Anti-Alito Petition


Naral Anti-Alito Petition


Rolling Justice


Plan B Petition


Sending a FAX via the Web (For those of us that don't have a fax machine at home.)


Again, feel free to copy and paste any and all of the information or images you will see put up over the next couple of weeks by the Anti-Alito Brigade into Blogs and letters as we hold Alito's feet to the fire. Even if you only participate on a few of the days it can help make a difference. There are so many issues where Samuel Alito's views and allegiances are just flat out wrong for a SCOTUS nomination.


Note: Tommorrow's actions and reason's are still being worked on today. Feel free to check it out at Booman Tribune  (Just look for the "Justice" diaries) and any help or participation of any kind you can provide will be greatly appreciated. This is another action brought to you by the group that brought you "Operation Yellow Feather" which was a very successful cross blog protest. These actions are designed to help bring the "Left Blogosphere Think Tank" together on our many shared issues.



Watch for Alice's diaries on the "separation of church and state/religious freedom" for days 6 and 7... On two different days because we want to keep them twice as separated!



Actions for: Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4

Wednesday, December 14, 2005

12 Days of Justice

There are many reasons to be wary of the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.



Over the next 12 days the Anti-Alito Brigade will be bringing you many of those reasons, and also some actions that you might consider to help stop this horrible nomination.


The main intention of this nomination is to try and tip the balance of power away from the legislative branch and towards the President.


Alito is an activist judge that will legislate from the bench on many of the issues that all progressives hold dear to their heart.


Our intention is that everyone across the Left Blogosphere participates in this any way that they can. Write a few letters, send Emails, send Faxes, and make some phonecalls to your Senators and Reps. (I know Reps don't vote on this, BUT they can provide more pressure on this issue to those that do vote on Alito! Besides, it is fun to piss them off... lol)


Taken from Tampopo's BooTrib diary:


December 12, 2005


You should be very wary of Judge Samuel Alito. Perhaps afraid is more accurate.


Judge Samuel Alito does not respect the primary role of the Legislative branch of our government. Therefore, he should not be considered acceptable to any member of Congress, particularly true Conservatives, regardless of his opinions on other matters held dear.


Judge Alito is a threat to your role in the structure of our government. You practice the art of politicking, balancing constituents' concerns and needs with those of our society as a whole. Legislation is challenged in court, as it should be when the interpretation of a law is in question. Judge Alito's record suggests he is not a "strict constructionist" of the Constitution.


Norm Ornstein, of the prestigious American Enterprise Institute, has recognized the danger Judge Alito represents. In his article, "Judge Alito Doesn't Show Congress Enough Deference," Ornstein states:

  [Supreme Court Justice John] Roberts respects Congress and its constitutional primacy; Alito shows serious signs that he does not...

  ...Roberts is a very conservative guy, and a strict constructionist -- one who means it. He understands that Congress is the branch the framers set up in Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution. It is not coincidence that Article 1 is twice as long as Article II, which created the executive branch, and almost four times as long as Article III, which established the judiciary. Judges should bend over doubly and triply backward before overturning a Congressional statute, especially if it is clear that Congress acted carefully and deliberatively...


The court case that has Mr. Ornstein turning such a critical eye on Judge Alito is from 1996, "United States v Rybar." This case involved a challenge to Congress's right to regulate the possession or transfer of machine guns.


From Mr. Ornstein,

  Congress had passed the law in a reasonable and deliberate fashion. A genuine practitioner of judicial restraint would have allowed them a wide enough berth to do so. Alito's colleagues did just that. But Alito used his own logic to call for its overturn, arguing that the possession of machine guns by private individuals had no economic activity associated with it, and that no real evidence existed that private possession of guns increased crime in a way that affected commerce -- and thus Congress had no right to regulate it. That kind of judicial reasoning often is referred to as reflecting the "Constitution in Exile."

  Whatever it is, it's not judicial restraint.


In response to Alito's opinion, the majority said, "Nothing in Lopez (an earlier Supreme Court case) requires either Congress or the Executive to play Show and Tell with the federal courts at the peril of invalidation of a Congressional statute."


Mr. Ornstein's final sentence is a caution to you,

  Whatever else it does with Judge Alito at the confirmation hearings, the Senate needs to hold his feet to the fire on this larger issue of deference to the legislative branch.


Don't let Judge Alito's opinions on single issues distract you from the danger he presents to our nation's Constitutional foundation. Reject his nomination and encourage your colleagues to do the same.


Three groups to contact:


Your senators


The Judiciary Committee


And your representatives


Feel free to lift the image here or any of the others over at Booman Tribune, and feel free to copy and paste any and all of the information you will see put up over the next couple of weeks into Blogs and letters as we hold Alito's feet to the fire.


Even if you only participate on a few of the days it can help make a difference. There are so many issues where Samuel Alito's views and allegiances are just flat out wrong for a SCOTUS nomination.


Note: Tommorrow's actions and reason's are still being worked on today. Feel free to check it out at Booman Tribune (Just look for the "Justice" diaries) and any help or participation of any kind you can provide will be greatly appreciated. This is another action brought to you by the group that brought you "Operation Yellow Feather" which was a very successful cross blog protest. These actions are designed to help bring the "Left Blogosphere Think Tank" together on our many shared issues.


X-posted at My Left Wing, Booman Tribune , My Left Nutmeg, Political Cortex

And also Front Paged or posted by Cedwyn at: Dembloggers, ePluribus Media,   MyDD, and TPM Cafe reader Blogs as well as by shermanesqe at Street Prophets and C&J

Friday, December 09, 2005

Nancy Johnson's Junk in the Trunk

It seems that Nancy Johnson's political career has a lot of junk in the trunk...

Deroy Murdock on Medicare on National Review Online:

"This fiscal malpractice has not bought the White House even political dividends. An August 25-26, 2003 Gallup poll found 40 percent of adults approved of the president's handling of Medicare while 48 percent disapproved. After the benefit's adoption, a March 26-28, 2004 Gallup survey saw 35 percent approve of Bush on Medicare, while disapproval climbed to 55 percent. What a bargain: Each one-point drop in Bush's Medicare approval rating cost Americans $44.5 billion.

The GOP Congress should dump the drug benefit. They should spare taxpayers this absurdly expensive new project whose true costs were concealed by an administration that sacrificed integrity and fiscal responsibility on an altar of blind ambition.

Instead, Republicans should develop a modest plan for poor seniors who lack coverage, rather than any American over 65, including multimillionaires and those who already have drug insurance.

The Medicare drug benefit has metastasized from bad policy to bad politics and now to scandal and possible criminality. This law begs to be euthanized. The GOP should pulls its plug. As for the perpetrators of this colossal public fraud, the Justice Department should fit them for orange jumpsuits."


And this is the legislation she was was so proud of and pinning her 2006 re-election hopes on? Well now, If that ain't an elephant passing some serious gas on to the voters?

Careful now!

Never stand behind an elephant that is full of it... You never know when it is going to take its next dump on YOU!

Chris Murphy flushes Johnson's Crap

So... What does Democrat hopeful Chris Murphy have to say about all of this?

Drug Benefit will be a problem for Johnson in 2006

Nancy Johnson's biggest legislative effort in years - the drug benefit bill - seems to be falling drastically short of doing what it promised - helping seniors afford their perscriptions. The NY Times explains why this bill will be an albatross around the necks of Republicans in 2006, Johnson in particular.

Already, many Democratic strategists argue that the new program - because of its complicated structure and gaps in coverage - could be much more of a problem than an asset for Republicans next year. Some Democratic challengers are already using the issue on the campaign trail, like Christopher S. Murphy, who hopes to unseat Representative Nancy L. Johnson of Connecticut, a senior Republican who played an important role in writing the law.

"Seniors, frustrated with the complexity of the drug benefit, are realizing that it was constructed to help the insurance industry and the drug industry," said Mr. Murphy, a state senator, in a common Democratic refrain. "It's more helpful to those industries than to a lot of seniors."

Read the rest of the story here.


Anyone that has tried to wade through Johnson's "signature legislation", either for themselves or a relative in need of medication, understands what a pile of hooey it is, and they are also begining to realize just how much more it is going to cost the people in need as well as all other taxpayers more than Johnson lied, err, said it would.

Johnson's rolling in it...
Dirty money that is!

Not only does she take drug industry money out the ying-yang in order to finance her campaign efforts, but Johnson also takes dirty money from Tom Delay.

You can feel free to stand behind Johnson if you want to... But don't say I didn't warn you.

She is full of it!

Tuesday, November 15, 2005

Operation Flying Monkees

Crooks and Liars has the latest on the presidents speech to rally the flying monkees:


TDS on the Speech

Stewart started Monday off with a look back at President Bush's speech to our troops on V-Day.

Click to see video at C&L...

You knew there had to be a talking head montage thrown in for good measure. Jon offers President Bush a simpler name to call the radicals since he gets so tongue tied. The end clip that TDS uses highlights the fact that Bush really makes about as much sense as Bert Lahr.

Thursday, November 10, 2005

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words

If a picture is worth a thousand words...


THAN THIS ONE SPEAKS VOLUMES!


CLICK ON THE PIC!

Thursday, September 29, 2005

Bush's Crash and Burn Policy on Iraq

Recently the Saudi foreign minister, Prince Saud al-faisal, has been heard pushing a message of the imminent failures in Iraq in the hopes that the bush admin. will hear what they are saying. Saudi worries are evidenced by al-faisal's recent quote in the NY Times:


"There is no dynamic now pulling the nation together," he said in a meeting with reporters at the Saudi Embassy here. "All the dynamics are pulling the country apart."


It is pretty darn obvious that the Saudies are concerned with the "seemingly" incompetent actions taken by the bush admin, and the influence that Iran is gaining over Iraq as a result of the incompetence.


But is this not a direct result of the real neocon agenda that is succeeding at ripping apart Iraq through Civil War?


It just happens that some of the parts that may break off are gaining strong Iranian influences.


Taken from the Timesonline:


Tougher language is being heard in the Arab world, where Iran has been a foe from the time of the Persians. Prince Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister, said: "We fought a war together to keep Iran out of Iraq after Iraq was driven out of Kuwait. Now we are handing the whole country over to Iran without reason."


Snip


Under the provisions of Iraq's federal constitution, which will go before a referendum on October 15, provinces will be allowed to create regional authorities. That has given rise to fears that the Shias in the south, with the support of Iran, will seek to create a mini Shia Islamic state, as Mr al-Hakim has already stated he wants.


I think the reasoning behind their message to the bush admin. becomes pretty darn clear when you read what the Saudi Foreign minister says up there.


They are freaking about Iranian influence that has resulted from the tensions created by the US.


Taken from the Timesonline:


    CROSS-BORDER INFLUENCE


    Badr Brigades


A Shia militia force of 12,000 trained by Iran's Revolutionary Guards and blamed for a spate of recent killings of Sunni Muslims. Thought to control several cities in southern Iraq


    Islamic Dawaa Party


Shia party that has strong links to Iran. Its leader, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, the present Prime Minister, has vowed to improve ties between the two neighbours


    Mahdi Army


Received arms and volunteers from Iran during its battle against US and British troops last year. Ahmed al-Fartusi, its commander in Basra, was arrested by British forces last weekend


    Mujahidin for Islamic Revolution in Iraq


Tehran-backed militia blamed for the murder of six British Royal Military Police soldiers in Majar el-Kabir in 2003


    Thar Allah (Vengeance of God)


Iranian-backed terror group blamed for killing former members of the ruling Baath party and enforcing strict Islamic law


    Jamaat al-Fudalah (Group of the Virtuous)


Paramilitary group that imposes Islamic rules on Shia areas; attacks shops selling alcohol and music


    Al-Fadilah (Morality)


Secret political movement financed by Iran. Thought to have many members among provincial officials


    Al-Quawaid al-Islamiya (Islamic Bases)


Iranian-backed Islamic movement that uses force to impose Islamic law


From a Saudi perspective... Things aren't quite what they'd hoped for, huh?


Never mind that it is civil war, and likely what the bushies were trying for.


This only magnifies that point:

AlJazeera


The western media has laboured hard in portraying the "Sunni community" as the major source of delay in the drafting process. The Bush administration has habitually presented events in Iraq as sectarian and ethnically biased; this presentation is not arbitrary or due to "misunderstanding" as some have claimed.


More truthfully, differing visions of Iraq are what delayed and essentially prevented the constitutional process from achieving consensual support. On the one hand we have an American-endorsed vision that proposes dividing Iraq up and we have the view of the opposition, which accepts nothing less than a unified Iraq.


In the autumn of 2004 the RAND Corporation, an American research company, published a research brief for the United States Navy arguing "cleavages within the Muslim world pose challenges and opportunities ... for US interests and strategy".


"I am making an appeal to all Iraqi citizens. Please do not divide yourselves anymore than you already have, and by dividing you empower the occupation and their agendas for your natural resources."


The RAND study highlights current divisions in the Muslim world between the Sunni and Shia, as well as between Arabs and non-Arabs as crucial to US interests.


The ethnic and sectarian federalism that has been proposed in Iraq fits well into this divisive framework. This insight into the strategic thinking of US thinktanks provides a contextual background to any assessment of US involvement in the Arab and Muslim world.


Here is a link to Rand's article U.S. Strategy in the Muslim World After 9/11 (the one refered to in the Al Jazeera article).


In the entire Rand article there is one little sentence that sums up "what might happen?"


Beyond these long-term factors, certain catalytic events have shifted the political environment in the Muslim world toward radicalism. Major events include the Iranian revolution, the Afghan war with the Soviets, the Gulf War of 1991, and the global war on terrorism after September 11. The Iraq war and the removal of Saddam Hussein have surely had an effect on the Muslim world, but the long-term implications remain to be seen. A stable, pluralistic, and democratic Iraq would challenge anti-Western views in the Middle East and would undermine extremist arguments. On the other hand, if Iraq reverts to authoritarianism or fragments into ethnic enclaves, then U.S. credibility would diminish and radical groups would have greater opportunities to take hold.


And, golly gee... Is it ever happening.


But what if that was the bushies intention all along?


You can read almost any of Dahr Jamail's "Iraqi Dispatches" to get the true sense of how they are constantly creating more problems amongst the different Iraqi groups. At times it is almost like they are doing it all on purpose:

The failed siege of Fallujah


Thus, rather than improving security and stability in Fallujah and Iraq, the siege of Fallujah has accomplished nothing more than devastating the city and spreading the Iraqi resistance into other cities, such as Qaim, Beji, Baquba, Mosul, Ramadi, Latifiya and many areas of Baghdad.


It could easily be argued now that the siege of Fallujah accomplished the exact opposite of its stated goals - rather than bringing increased security and stability, it has inflamed tempers, deepened sectarian rifts and spurred the Iraqi resistance into levels of attack rarely seen prior to the siege.


---------------------


U.S. Claims Over Siege Challenged


He said continuing violations by U.S. soldiers had provoked people into confronting the occupying forces. He said troops had been raiding homes, sending women into the streets without their hijabs and entering areas where women sleep.


"The fighters are just local people who refuse to be treated like dogs," he said. "Nobody wants the Americans here."


---------------------


This is our Guernica


Two US attempts were made to destroy this symbol of defiance last year. The first, in April, fizzled out after Iraqi politicians, including many who supported the invasion of their country, condemned the use of air strikes to terrorise an entire city.


snip


One thing is certain: the attack on Falluja has done nothing to still the insurgency against the US-British occupation nor produced the death of al-Zarqawi - any more than the invasion of Afghanistan achieved the capture or death of Osama bin Laden. Thousands of bereaved and homeless Falluja families have a new reason to hate the US and its allies.


snip


This decade's unforgettable monument to brutality and overkill is Falluja, a text-book case of how not to handle an insurgency, and a reminder that unpopular occupations will always degenerate into desperation and atrocity.


---------------------


Sects and Solidarity in Iraq


The spokesman's point is clear: After decades of repression, now is the time for the Shiites to have power, no matter the price. "Most of the Sunnis are accepted by us, but there are those among them who don't want the Shia in the government, nor the Kurds. Some Sunnis will either kill us or make us slaves. We accept these elections now," says Asadi, pulling the abaya close over his shoulders. "But many Shias and Kurds believe dividing the country is the only real solution."


snip


With Shiite domination in the National Assembly, they will have much power in writing Iraq's new constitution. Will this lopsided dynamic provoke a violent reaction from the Sunni-dominated insurgency? If it does, will the Shiite militias, like the Badr Organization, the armed wing of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), strike back, igniting a civil war?


snip


When examining the statements of some political and religious leaders from both communities, one gets the sense that civil war is indeed imminent. Sheik Asadi's venom toward the Sunni is matched by that of some of his Sunni counterparts toward the Shiites. But Western media outlets, focusing on the sensational, have played up the potential for civil war, muting the voices of Sunni and Shiite leaders who are skeptical of such predictions and united against partition.


---------------------


Etc., Etc., Etc.! Dahr Jamail has these comments littered throughout many of his reports.



That last part in bold is the kicker... The media is "playing up the potential for civil war" and bushies policies only inflame the situation.


We see this every day as one seemingly incompetent decision follows another.


It makes it all pretty darn clear what the Saudies see as a problem.


The bush admin. wants to divide the country up and, per usual, the media is only helping them along. Neocons want Iraq to descend into civil war which will, theoretically, make each part more manageable for America.


Either that or they are completely incompetent and clueless as to how much the US forces presence there, and their actions based on bush policies, are the cause of most of the problems in Iraq.


We have all seen the resulting chaos from neocon theory thus far. It isn't pretty. It has failed miserably in every aspect and every step of the way.


Just ignore the thousands that had to die to create their chaos. And ignore the fact that it leaves Iranians with more influence in the region.


I have heard suggestions that, perhaps, Saudies are sending a message to their own people that they need to become more involved in this Iranian/Iraqi situation...

Saturday, September 10, 2005

Booman Tribune ~ Debunking Katrina: With the Consent of the Governed

Here is the truth:

Debunking Katrina: With the Consent of the Governed

by DuctapeFatwa
Fri Sep 9th, 2005 at 09:31:11 PM EDT

We must be fair and balanced. The first debunking efforts were undertaken under the most inauspicious conditions. Officials were only accorded one side of a TV screen to explain to Americans that the live feeds taking place on the other side of the screen showed not truth but rumors, reports unconfirmed by authorities.

We must understand that at this time, the only news coming from the theatre came from people on the ground in scratchy breaky phone calls, a handful of bloggers, and reporters operating without benefit of embedding or vetting.

So if there were those who may have believed those rumors regarding conditions and crimes in the shelter pits into which crowded those New Orleanians politically naive enough to believe that they and their families would be safer than on the roof, if there were those who may have lent credence to rumors of slow responses from various government agencies, before they are denounced as un American consider the difficulties under which their leaders were operating at the moment.

Things have turned the corner now, and only a handful of dead enders and the people who survived the experience believe these rumors now.

Loyal Americans understand that while conditions in dome and center may not have been luxurious, nor on the expressway, things were not all that bad, and of course there were no crimes, no one was prevented from escape, people were not really dying of heat stroke or thirst or lack of medicine. Those are just rumors. Like the rumors of the 1927 replay of the canal strategy that flooded the city's poor area to save the fine homes in the Garden District and the historic French Quarter, both seen as keepers by those who are already hard at work planning the new and improved New Orleans. All the old world charm without the pesky poor.

And after a few territorial squabbles, federal, state and local officials are at last on the same page, and working together to craft a reasonable death toll that while tragic, will not prove too disturbing to more sensitive viewers.

One of the most comforting steps taken in recent days is the President's vow to personally oversee an investigation into any possible glitches that may have taken place in the response to the disaster.

His advisors, including the formidable Mr. Rove, wasted no time in developing a strategy to reassure the more skittish segment of the American public that their government had things firmly in hand, and would keep it that way.

That, coming on the heels of not one, but two Presidential flyovers of the area, and even one touchdown visit to console local politicians.

The egalitarian nature of the nation, and the President's concern for the humblest of his subjects cannot be more clearly illustrated than these flyovers. The Presidential aircraft could be seen by those fortunate enough to have successfully made an opening in their roofs, those on the expressways, those outside the shelterpits, and we can only imagine how much the sight must have meant to them, as they sat there, gasping. For many it will have been the last sight they saw.

Is it any wonder that not even Kim Jung Il enjoys deeper affection from his people?

So the corner is turned, but there is still much hard work ahead. Popular pundit Michelle Malkin, thoughtful as usual, expressed the hope that potentially troublesome eyewitnesses would be excluded from any investigation, which should, she declared, be a private affair, unburdened by any media who might not have recovered completely from the rumors and unconfirmed reports they thought they saw.

The survivor diaspora will be most helpful in avoiding such an eventuality, as well as the tragic but inevitable passing of many of them, if not from effects of the original rumors, from the second wave of rumors of West Nile, hepatitis, and the kinder gentler cholera promised by corporate charity mavens.

After having written checks to the Red Cross to help their executives maintain the lifestyle to which they are accustomed, and thus proving their compassion to their poor brethren in need, and a few hours of volunteer work down at the shelter, where too often, Lord and Lady Bountiful are horrified and repulsed to learn that the less fortunate are not sufficiently schooled in the soft skills to demonstrate appropriate gratitude for having been allowed to escape with their lives, if not their health, or all their family members, right thinking Americans will soon be free to return their focus on the positive:

US gunmen continue to occupy and reduce the population in two countries openly, and the public can rest assured that covert operations are also taking place elsewhere, and on the storm front, now that the rumors have been debunked, yes, there was a hurricane, and quite a bit of property damage, but the good news is that both Halliburton and Bechtel, among others, will be putting their expertise to work to make it right, and Halliburton will be raising all its prices in October, good news for investors!

And God, speaking as he does, through Bush, as revealed by Bush himself, has issued an executive order empowering these fine wealth builders to shake off the burden of oppressive laws requiring the paying of prevailing wages, meaning that survivors who are still at large in the area will be able to obtain work which will provide them with dignity, and possibly up to a dollar or two above the minimum wage.

So all in all, yes there was a little wind, and sadly, a few lost their lives. But rumors of devastation and catastrophe, of genocide and slaveship hells, of rape and murder and mutilation, of thousands gasping their last on the asphalt of I-10, were just that- rumors, probably started by a certain element with an agenda.

Just a little wind, but everything is being made right now, with the consent of the governed.

Sad... But true.

Wednesday, August 24, 2005

Drinking Liberally in New Milford: Booman Tribune ~ Boo!

OK... So Roberts has a few problems... And, of course, those people, the kind that are rabid about ruining the Constitution by inserting religion into politics, are running around New Milford now with TWO FLAGS on their car because ONE FLAG hasn't been patriotic enough to gloss over their lies, corruption, and flat out anti-patriotic stupidity as they do idiotic things like run over memorials to fallen soldiers at Camp Casey.

Thank God there are many soldiers that are supporting the efforts of Cindy Sheehan! Count me as one, and my brother in-law, who leaves for Iraq in a month or so for his second tour, would be two.

Cindy had this to say about their move to a piece of property that will be a little bit safer than the ditch bush's secret service originally forced them into.
We are moving to a place that doesn't have much shade and I put out an appeal for tarps and a soldier from Ft. Hood brought some to us that he "borrowed" from Ft. Hood for us to use. I have had a lot of soldiers from Ft. Hood come out and tell me to keep it up and that I am doing a good thing. We are doing this to honor Casey and the other fallen heroes in their memories. But we are doing it FOR the people of Iraq and the other soldiers who are in harm's way right now. Right after we heard about the crosses last night, a Camp Casey volunteer found out that a pen pal she had in Iraq was KIA on August 12th. This has to stop, now. We will stop it.

As noble as Cindy Sheehan's cause is, that isn't what this blog is about. Susanhu has a little info on Roberts that might be worth knowing:

Why Didn't Judge Roberts Recuse Himself?

by susanhu
Thu Aug 18th, 2005 at 10:30:27 PM EDT

"Roberts was part of a three-judge panel that handed President Bush an important victory the week before he announced Roberts' nomination to the bench," reports Democracy Now!.

"The appeals court ruled in the Hamdan V. Rumsfeld case that the military tribunals of detainees held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, could proceed. The decision also found that Bush could deny terrorism captives prisoner-of-war status as outlined by the Geneva Conventions." Said Georgetown law professor David Luban today in today's DN! interview:

[Roberts] knew that he was on the three-judge panel as early as last December. The case was argued, the oral argument was April 7. Six days before ... he had an interview with Att'y Gen. Gonzales. [W]hile the case was deliberated, there's a gap between April 7, when the oral argument took place, and July 15, when the court issued the decision. He had numerous other interviews for the Supreme Court judgeship. [T]hat's the period of time in which he is deliberating and presumably discussing with the other judges on the panel what the ruling should be in the case.

Michael Ratner, president of the Center for Constitutional Rights (see the blogroll on the left), said:

[M]y reaction [is] utter amazement ... [O]n April 1, a week before the argument, [Roberts met] with Gonzales, the Attorney General who was the architect of the entire policy that the Geneva Conventions shouldn't apply to [Guantanamo detainees], that they should use military commissions, and he’s meeting with this guy at the same time that he is sitting on a case that's going to determine whether or not the Geneva Conventions apply.

[A]t a minimum, as David's article clearly says in Slate, his impartiality might reasonably have been questioned [and Judge Roberts] should have disqualified himself. There's not any issue about it.

I would go further. It reminds me of a case when Ellsberg [Pentagon Papers] was on trial for espionage. During the trial President Nixon, briefly, but other people in his office, Ehrlichman and others, met with the trial judge to offer him to be the head of the F.B.I. [T]he outcry [was] huge. ...

Listen/watch/read all. Goodman also asks both men about the missing documents. Emphases mine.


I know this has to be just a bit of a conflict of interest here... But I have morals and values, so I don't count political CYA by bush as a good thing when it comes to crimes against humanity. If bush really wanted to cover his ass all he had to do was ask the White House GOP prostitute Jeff Gannon, or if he was in this town he could ask Jay Lewyn... Same diff...

I really ought to go and see what "4 on the floor 4 bush" Jay and all of his "GOP talking point brigade" have to say about all of this at "Jay Lewyn - For the love of God CENSOR ME!"... But I have already read the GOP talking points, so why waste my time, huh?

Nevermind the fact that if Jay isn't feeling gay enough about what he says in this town, well, he just goes back and tries to change the wording of the town records... Can't afford to look too stupid...

How many flags for you and your GOP buddies Jay?
One or two?
DOH!

Sunday, August 14, 2005

A nod to the realities of the soldiers plight.

THE BRAD BLOG:

"In a departure from the norm in Kentucky -- one of the reddest of red states -- some of Comley's relatives, including a few sitting in the front pews, have spoken out strongly against the Bush administration and the war that took the 21-year-old Marine's life.
...
On Friday, Comley's grandmother, 80-year-old Geraldine Comley of Versailles, described herself in an interview as a former Republican stalwart who is "on a rampage" against the president and the war.

She said she would like nothing better than to join Cindy Sheehan, the mother of a fallen soldier who has been holding a peace vigil outside President Bush's ranch in Texas.

"When someone gets up and says 'My son died for our freedom,' or I get a sympathy card that says that, I can hardly bear it," Geraldine Comley said.

She said her view, developed before her grandson's death, is that Bush pushed for war because Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had tried to assassinate the first President Bush, and to get control of Mideast oil.

"And it irritates me no small amount that Dick Cheney, in the Vietnam War, said he had 'other priorities,'" Geraldine Comley said. "He didn't mind sending my grandson over there" to Iraq.""
Written by: Winter Patriot


My deepest and sincerest condolences to the Comley family in the loss of their son, and my thanks to Cindy Sheehan for faithfully representing the many who demand better leadership in this country.

Fearing backlash, Pentagon moves to block new Abu Ghraib photos - Yahoo! News

Is there even one idiot on this earth that will believe this BS line coming from the pentagon and the White House?

Fearing backlash, Pentagon moves to block new Abu Ghraib photos - Yahoo! News:
Sat Aug 13, 3:50 PM ET

"WASHINGTON (AFP) - The
Pentagon has moved forcefully to block the release of new video evidence of prisoner abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison, arguing it would help recruit new Islamist insurgents and endanger American lives."


Too late morons... The insurgents already know the truth about the torture the corrupt bush administration and the incompetent Petagon officials sanctioned.

THEY HAD TO SUFFER THROUGH IT!

Just who is it you are trying to protect there?
He further states that should the pictures become public, they will "endanger the lives and physical safety of the soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines in the United States Armed Forces presently serving in Iraq and
Afghanistan."

Americans aren't that stupid. We already know that the insurgents are quite aware of the torture.

WHEN IDIOTS LIKE BUSH, GONZALES, AND RUMSFELD, ETC., GAVE THE GREEN LIGHT ON TORTURE THEY ENDANGERED EVERY SOLDIER IN THE MILITARY AS WELL AS EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN AND ANY OTHER COUNTRY THAT IS IN IRAQ HELPING THE US.

We already know who you are trying to protect and who is really to blame.

Meanwhile, ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero insists the real reason the Pentagon is fighting the release of the new evidence is because it demonstrates "the failure of American leaders who placed our young men and women in compromising situations and are now seeking to blame them for it."

Friday, August 12, 2005

Typical Republican Answer...

These are exactly the kind of false patriots that wrap themselves in the flag or slap ribbons on their SUVs... And do nothing else to support the troops.
Parent-trap snares recruiters:

"Staff Sgt. Jason Rivera, 26, a Marine recruiter in Pittsburgh, went to the home of a high school student who had expressed interest in joining the Marine Reserve to talk to his parents.

It was a large home in a well-to-do suburb north of the city. Two American flags adorned the yard. The prospect's mom greeted him wearing an American flag T-shirt.

'I want you to know we support you,' she gushed.

Rivera soon reached the limits of her support.

'Military service isn't for our son. It isn't for our kind of people,' she told him"


"IT ISN'T FOR OUR KIND OF PEOPLE"

WTF???

Your kind of people should be bitch slapped all the way to hell. (These days, that would be the average Iraqi neighborhood..)

"Go bush! Go war! See my faded flag? Kill, kill, KILL! But we don't do that sort of lowly job ourselves... That is for the hired help. Our patriotic duty is just to vote for this. Oh yeah! And to slap a bumpersticker on our SUV."


Your kind sickens me.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Airman suspect in anti-Bush case

This anti-bush soldier might be in a little bit of trouble, huh?
BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Airman suspect in anti-Bush case:

A US air force reserve colonel may face charges of defacing cars bearing bumper stickers in support of President Bush.

Lieutenant Colonel Alexis Fecteau is suspected of painting obscenities on 12 parked cars at Denver International Airport over a six-month period.

Police allege he blacked out the stickers and then spray-painted expletives on the vehicles.


Allegedly, Lieutenant Colonel Fecteau is suspected of vandalising 12 cars at the airport.

Most of the soldiers I talk to don't like or appreciate the fake support of those little ribbons and bumper stickers, but I think this guy may have gone a little bit over the line legally.

Kudos to him for finding some way to vent his frustration on the idiot bumper sticker warriors of the GOP.

Like the stain the sticker leaves on your car will ever compare to the stain of a soldiers blood on the desert sands?

False patriots...
Every stinking hypocritical one of you!

With the disposable way some of you treat soldiers just to fill a tank of gas, can you blame a soldier for getting mad at you?

Rove's Treason, and the GOP Liars...

For those of you that keep sending me all of those "GOP talking point" lies in my Email (Are you listening Darrel?) and don't even have the decency to reply to my responses that tear up your lies line by line, instead trying to change the subject to another of your losing arguments...Well, here is a little post that deals with some of the BS you send out daily:

CLAIM: White House Can’t Comment While Investigation Is Ongoing
McClellan: “While that investigation is ongoing, the White House is not going to comment on it.”

FACT: White House Has Repeatedly Commented During the Ongoing Investigation
McClellan had previously cited that same investigation and then gone on to answer the questions as they pertained to Rove. For example, on October 1, 2003, he said, “There’s an investigation going on … you brought up Karl’s name. Let’s be very clear. I thought — I said it was a ridiculous suggestion, I said it’s simply not true that he was involved in leaking classified information, and — nor, did he condone that kind of activity.” Similarly, on October 10, 2003, McClellan said, “I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is an ongoing investigation.” But he then added with regard to a question about Rove’s involvement, “I spoke with those individuals, as I pointed out, and those individuals assured me they were not involved in this.”

CLAIM: Rove Didn’t Leak The Name So He’s Not Guilty
Rove: “I didn’t know her name and didn’t leak her name.” Rove attorney Robert Luskin said “he did not tell any reporter that Valerie Plame worked for the CIA.”

FACT: National Security Law Says Identifying Covert Agent Is Illegal
Rove at the very least identified Plame as “Wilson’s wife.” Under section 421 of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, the disclosure of “any information identifying [a] covert agent” is illegal.

CLAIM: White House Didn’t Push The Story
Rove’s lawyer Robert Luskin claims Cooper manipulated what Rove said to him “in a pretty ugly fashion to make it seem like people in the White House were affirmatively reaching out to reporters to try to get them to report negative information about Plame.”

FACT: There Was An Organized Campaign To Push Leak Info
First, Robert Novak admitted: “I didn’t dig it out [Plame’s identity], it was given to me…. They [the White House] thought it was significant, they gave me the name and I used it.” Second, Rove told Chris Matthews that Plame’s identity was “fair game.” Third, Time magazine reported the orchestrated campaign against Wilson in October 2003: “In the days after Wilson’s essay appeared, government officials began to steer reporters away from Wilson’s conclusions.”

CLAIM: Conversation Was About Welfare Reform, So Rove Didn’t Do Anything Wrong
National Review’s Byron York: “According to Luskin, the fact that Rove did not call Cooper; that the original purpose of the call, as Cooper told Rove, was welfare reform.”

FACT: What They Spoke About Was Irrelevant
The original purpose of the conversation between Rove and Cooper is irrelevant. It has no bearing on the fact that Rove did identify a covert agent during that conversation.

CLAIM: Plame Wasn’t An Undercover Agent
Ed Rogers, former official under Reagan/Bush: “I think it is now a matter of established fact that Mrs. Plame was not a protected covert agent, and I don’t think there’s any meaningful investigation about that.”

FACT: Former CIA Officer Who Worked With Plame Verified She Was Undercover
Larry Johnson, former CIA officer: “Valerie Plame was a classmate of mine from the day she started with the CIA. I entered on duty at the CIA in September 1985. All of my classmates were undercover–in other words, we told our family and friends that we were working for other overt U.S. Government agencies. We had official cover.”

CLAIM: Rove Was Trying To Correct A False Story
Rove attorney Luskin added, “What Karl was trying to do … was to warn Time away from publishing things that were going to be established as false.

FACT: Wilson Was Right, Bush Was Wrong
Bloomberg recently reported, “Two-year old assertions by former ambassador Joseph Wilson regarding Iraq and uranium, which lie at the heart of the controversy over who at the White House identified a covert U.S. operative, have held up in the face of attacks by supporters of presidential adviser Karl Rove.”

CLAIM: Wilson Lied About His Trip To Niger
Former Rove deputy Ken Mehlman: “What Joe Wilson alleged was that the vice president, then he said the CIA director sent him to Niger.” [CNN, 7/12/05]

FACT: Wilson Never Said Cheney Personally Sent Him To Niger
Bloomberg reported, “Wilson never said that Cheney sent him, only that the vice president’s office had questions about an intelligence report that referred to the sale of uranium yellowcake to Iraq from Niger. Wilson, in his New York Times article, said CIA officials were informed of Cheney’s questions. ‘The agency officials asked if I would travel to Niger to check out the story so they could provide a response to the vice president’s office,’ Wilson wrote.”

Posted by Faiz July 14, 2005 6:09 pm

Permalink


Thanks to Faiz over at Think Progress for making this clear and concise post dealing with the BS.

As for you "GOP talking point" liars, well, if you continue to fill my inbox with your stupidity and lies than I will have no choice but to tear them up point-by-point right here on the Blog with your Email attached to your lies so everyone will know just how much of a liar, and just how stupid you truely are.

Anyone that has the nerve to call me "Sir" in an Email (a sign of respect) and fill out the rest of their Email with flat out lies taken straight from the "GOP talking points" hall of shame (showing a complete and utter disrespect to any person of logic) is a hypocrite and deserves all of the disrespect that is returned to them ten times over.

I don't play footsy under the table with the GOP like a Dem does... I am an independent, and for good reason... I will flat out call a spade a spade, and a liar a liar. (Got that Darrel?)

So, in the future, should you decide to send me lies and distorted facts as a response to something I write expect to become totally and completely embarrassed here in public.

I have absolutely no problem with being proven wrong in my opinions, BUT at least I show the proper courtesy of basing my opinions on facts.

Something that the "GOP talking point posters" avoid at all costs:

FACTS!
(OH yeah! And reality...)

Welcome to my world you semi-epsilon-moron-minus GOP talking point idiots. Ignore the khaki brown color of your posts? Why? Did the elephant crap all over you and your logic again?

Wednesday, August 10, 2005

Rep. Nancy Johnson's Scandal Plagued Legislation

It seems that Nancy Johnson's political career has a lot of junk in the trunk...
Deroy Murdock on Medicare on National Review Online:
"This fiscal malpractice has not bought the White House even political dividends. An August 25-26, 2003 Gallup poll found 40 percent of adults approved of the president's handling of Medicare while 48 percent disapproved. After the benefit's adoption, a March 26-28, 2004 Gallup survey saw 35 percent approve of Bush on Medicare, while disapproval climbed to 55 percent. What a bargain: Each one-point drop in Bush's Medicare approval rating cost Americans $44.5 billion.

The GOP Congress should dump the drug benefit. They should spare taxpayers this absurdly expensive new project whose true costs were concealed by an administration that sacrificed integrity and fiscal responsibility on an altar of blind ambition.

Instead, Republicans should develop a modest plan for poor seniors who lack coverage, rather than any American over 65, including multimillionaires and those who already have drug insurance.

The Medicare drug benefit has metastasized from bad policy to bad politics and now to scandal and possible criminality. This law begs to be euthanized. The GOP should pulls its plug. As for the perpetrators of this colossal public fraud, the Justice Department should fit them for orange jumpsuits."

And this is the legislation she was was so proud of and pinning her re-election hopes on? Well now, If that ain't an elephant passing some serious gas on to the voters?

Careful now!
Never stand behind an elephant that is full of it...
You never know when it is going to take its next dump on YOU!

Monday, August 08, 2005

Pigs On The Wing

While Juan Cole sets the record staright on the real issue of what is at the heart of the terror unleashed on London last week there is one very minor point he may have missed.
Salon.com News | "The time of revenge has come":

Blowback from Bush and Blair's incompetently pursued war on terror has hit London. When will the U.S. figure out how to fight smart?

By Juan Cole

July 8, 2005 | Credit for the horrific bombings of the London Underground and a double-decker bus on Thursday morning was immediately taken on a radical Muslim Web site by a 'secret group' of Qaida al-Jihad in Europe. By Thursday afternoon, as the casualty toll rose above 40 dead and 700 wounded, British Foreign Minister Jack Straw was saying, 'It has the hallmarks of an al-Qaida-related attack.' Although U.S. President George W. Bush maintains that al-Qaida strikes out at the industrialized democracies because of hatred for Western values, the statement said nothing of the sort. The attack, the terrorists proclaimed, was an act of sacred revenge for British 'massacres' in 'Afghanistan and Iraq,' and a punishment of the United Kingdom for its 'Zionism' (i.e., support of Israel). If they really are responsible, who is this group and what do they want?"


Don't you ever wonder where all of these web sites are coming from?
UK-based dissident denies link to website that carried al-Qaida claim

David Pallister - The Guardian
Saturday July 9, 2005

The claim of responsibility for the London attacks was first posted on one of the dozens of Islamic websites that are routinely monitored by western intelligence services.
The statement, under the name of the Secret Organisation of the al-Qaida Jihad in Europe, said: "The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern and western quarters."

...snip...

...two Israeli groups devoted to exposing the network of jihadist sites claim that it is connected to the London-based Saudi dissident Saad al-Faqih. Mr Faqih, who is based in Willesden, north-west London, and runs the Movement for Islamic Reform in Arabia (Mira), was designated by the US treasury last December as a supporter of al-Qaida. The UK Treasury followed suit by freezing Mr Faqih's assets.

Speaking in December 2004 before the assets were frozen, Mr Faqih ridiculed any idea that "millions of dollars" would be frozen. "I have no assets in the US and all I have in the UK is a current account with a few hundred pounds."


Well? At least someone out there is doing something about all of this by trying to freeze the assets of people that are involved...

But could we do more? Maybe...


It was posted on an Arabic website, al-qal3ah.com, which is registered by Qalaah Qalaah in Abu Dhabi and hosted by a server in Houston, Texas.


One would hope that they will deal with this Houston companies involvement in promoting terror? Maybe freezing all of their assets too...

Maybe?

When pigs can fly!

The server in Houston has intriguing connections. Everyone's Internet was founded by brothers Robert and Roy Marsh in 1998 and by 2002 had an income of more than $30m (now about £17m).

...snip...
Roy Marsh counts among his friends President George Bush's former sister-in-law, Sharon Bush, and the president's navy secretary.

Everyone's Internet, which also hosts a number of pornographic sites, states: "We support the uncensored flow of information and ideas over the internet and do not actively monitor subscriber activity under normal circumstances."


I am sure that investigators will clear Roy of any wrongdoing AFTER they have completely gone through all of the porn on those houston servers owned by another bush family porn pal.


If you didn't care what happened to me,
And I didn't care for you
We would zig zag our way
Through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
Wondering which of the buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing

Pink Floyd, Animals

Frist's Torturous Decision

If there was ever any question about who is supporting the soldiers, well, the Army Times had no problems figuring this out. They point out how alarmed Dems are that republicans would rather pander to special interest groups like the NRA instead of making the important decisions while we are supposed to be a nation at war.
Army Times - News - More News: "By Rick Maze
Times staff writer

Senate Republican leaders decided Tuesday that a gun manufacturers’ liability bill is more important than next year’s $441.6 billion defense authorization bill.

With Democrats expressing amazement that there could be any higher legislative priority in a time of war than the annual defense bill that includes money for pay and benefits, operations and maintenance, and weapons’ purchases and research, Sen. Bill Frist of Tennessee, the Senate Republican leader, decided Tuesday that a bill protecting gun manufacturers from lawsuits over the illegal use of firearms was a higher priority.

The decision came after Republican leaders failed to muster the 60 votes needed to prevent amendments not strictly related to the defense budget from being offered to the defense bill.

In a count of 50-48, seven Republicans joined Democrats in voting not to restrict debate, a move that Democratic leaders said would have prevented consideration of amendments to help veterans and survivors of deceased service members, along with other issues."


It is really important to understand that this effort to push back the bill is less about the funding for the war and more about getting more important rich elitist agendas to the floor quickly:
With Congress planning to leave town Friday for one-month break, debate on S 397, Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, is expected to last two or three days, and then Senate leaders plan to take up an energy bill, an estate tax reform bill and an Interior Department funding bill


A hat tip to QWQ, who had this note about Frist's torturous decision to sidetrack this:
Also, several folks have noted in the comments that pandering to the NRA is not the only reason the Republicans wanted to delay the Defense Authorization bill -- the White House also wanted to avoid showdowns on detainee treatment and military base closings. The new AP story has that angle, as does this CBS edited version of the original AP story.


Oh, yeah... The bushies don't want to give up their right to torture innocent Iraqis that are held along with the few terrorists in captivity... Go figure, huh? Apparently the republican controlled Senate doesn't work any better in making us safer than torture does at getting useful intel.

Sunday, July 31, 2005

Who Trains the Terrorists? Bush does...

Not only is the corrupt, lying, disastrous bush admin. creating more terrorists around the world because of their illegal invasion of Iraq BUT:

The Rachel Maddow Show:

A group of London politicians has written to the US ambassador in Britain demanding that the US Department of Justice take an al Qaeda training manual off its website. The British police apparently found it, but the US government posted it online. And now the brits are understandably mad about it. The manual includes advice on how to go undetected on crowded public transport, how to communicate and avoid detection by security services, how to transport weapons, and how to stop explosives from deteriorating.


They are also making sure these terrorists have easy access to the training manuals they need... All online!

What a useless bunch of idiots that occupy the White House right now.

New Milford Times - News - 07/22/2005 - Soldier charged as a fugitive

I know that many of you are good at getting messages out about this sort of stuff! Anyone care to help a stranger that is now in jail for going AWOL?

I don't know this person and I certainly do not have any knowledge of the circumstances for this man's decision to go AWOL (there are hundreds of reasons to not want to go to Iraq and I do not have to list them to you guys), but as a vet that luckily just got my "official honorable discharge" (the "2nd" honorable discharge you get from the IRR) last month, I feel a certain responsibility towards trying to figure out how to best help this young man that lives in my hometown.
New Milford Times - News - 07/22/2005 - Soldier charged as a fugitive:

"A New Milford man will likely face a court-martial for desertion from his Army National Guard Unit, following his arrest Tuesday by New Milford police as he allegedly left the scene of a minor car accident that occurred at 12:10 a.m.

(snip)

Assistant State's Attorney Jonathan Knight said his office contacted an Army investigator in New York who said that Mr. Johnston, a member of an Army National Guard unit based in Huntington, N.Y., was absent without leave (AWOL).

Mr. Knight said Mr. Johnston was arraigned in Bantam Superior Court Tuesday. He was then transported to a holding facility on Whalley Avenue in New Haven.

According to published reports, Mr. Johnson's unit, which is part of the 69th Mechanized Infantry Battalion, has been in Iraq for the past six months. There, it is attached to the 42nd Infantry Division, which had been deployed from Fort Benning, Ga."


I am going to try and contact a few of the Anti-war Veteran groups and see if they can help him, though I am not sure if any of them are already following this?

I would have enlisted for Afghanistan... BUT Iraq is a huge fuck-up! (To be blunt... And honest)

Thursday, July 28, 2005

Schmidt and Her DOM in OHIO

Conservatives get a behind the scenes view of what to expect from Schmidt if she wins...
Daily Kos :: Comments OH-2: The Commercial, The Poll, "Swift Boating" & the Pivot:

Yesterday, some of us who emailed the Schmidt campaign got mailbox full returns which pointed to campaign manager Joe Brauns real email address: deanofcorn@aol.com

Some of us did a google search on "deanofcorn" which returned 3 entries. The one in Canada is a mistype, it should have been "dean of com...merce", the M got spliced into a rn.

The only other 2 entries were for a "deanofcorn" user ID for the Scioto County, Ohio GOP and then this BDSM "deanofcorn" solicitation from Cincinnati "I am an experienced Dom seeking a sub for long term exploration and training."

Joe Braun (Schmidt's campaign manager) has the email address deanofcorn@aol.com, and the same deanofcorn user ID for the Cincinnati area GOP site. Its obvious that the BDSM deanofcorn in Cincinnati (the only other reference to deanofcorn on the net) is him. If any further evidence is needed, this article he authored in college puts him at the same age as the individual who likes to perform 'medical exams'.

by
tomVA


Now the only thing left to see is if Braun and Schmidt will air some video of their backroom meetings where he "whips" her into shape for the election?

Is there little wonder that the republican party is bringing in another $750,000 from the national level to try and buy her out of this?

Yep... The GOP is a slave to their own hypocrisy!

Hackett is an honorable soldier that served his country. As a Vet, I can appreciate that.

Schmidt is just a subservient low-life that surrounds herself with SCUM.

And the GOP has the nerve to run another "swifty" campaign on Hackett?

Conservative voters of OHIO:

WAKE UP!

The Ohio GOP is as corrupt as any of the ones in Texas or DC. You know it, and the nation knows it.

I am an independent and even I would choose Hackett over that scumbucket Schmidt.

Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net

pontificator noted that "at least a half dozen CIA and State department officials have spoken with prosecutors. " Given the testimony of Bill Harlow, a CIA spokesman Novak used to try and confim Valerie Plame Wilson's status in the CIA, it is apparent that none of the GOP talking points about her status at the CIA make any sense at all. Harlow made it plainly clear that Novak had a CIA "NO-go!!" on the story not once, but even a second time after confirming Mrs. Wilson's status as an undercover operator.
Prosecutor In CIA Leak Case Casting A Wide Net: "Harlow, the former CIA spokesman, said in an interview yesterday that he testified last year before a grand jury about conversations he had with Novak at least three days before the column was published. He said he warned Novak, in the strongest terms he was permitted to use without revealing classified information, that Wilson's wife had not authorized the mission and that if he did write about it, her name should not be revealed.

Harlow said that after Novak's call, he checked Plame's status and confirmed that she was an undercover operative. He said he called Novak back to repeat that the story Novak had related to him was wrong and that Plame's name should not be used. But he did not tell Novak directly that she was undercover because that was classified.

In a column published Oct. 1, 2003, Novak wrote that the CIA official he spoke to 'asked me not to use her name, saying she probably never again will be given a foreign assignment but that exposure of her name might cause 'difficulties' if she travels abroad. He never suggested to me that Wilson's wife or anybody else would be endangered. If he had, I would not have used her name.'"

Since Novak certainly knew the CIA said NO to the story twice it is pretty apperent that Novak should have known what he was doing was illegal at that point.

I guess some people think they should be above the law when it comes to weakening our national security. I can only hope that, after their corpses are released from jail, rove, libby, novak, and any of the other conspirators, enjoy their trip straight to hell for their little "GOP campaign to smear Wilson and the CIA" treason against America.

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

Santorum: The Village Idiot

Apparently some people in PA have a problem with the moral values Rick Santorum is teaching his kids, as well as the rest of America.
Letters to the editor: 7/21/05:
Not moral messages

As a teacher for the Diocese of Pittsburgh for 14 years, one important lesson I learned was that no matter what I said to the child, whatever the parents said superseded my message. What parents say and how they live sends a message stronger than any teacher's voice no matter what the issue.

Sen. Rick Santorum and his wife have taught their children a powerful lesson on civic responsibility by refusing to pay any tuition money to the Penn Hills School District for their children who attended the Pennsylvania Cyber Charter School ('Penn Hills Loses Bid to Charge Santorum,' July 12). Released from that payment on a technicality shows that even an upstanding, moral gentleman like Sen. Santorum teaches his children the following lessons:

1) Take advantage of the system whenever you can.

2) The little guy pays while the rich and powerful guy gets away with it.

3) As a Catholic, you have no obligation to pay your share to the common good in spite of Catholic social doctrine.

Finally, I am shocked that our religious leaders who see Sen. Santorum as some sort of faith-and-morals hero have not spoken up on this issue at all.

SISTER LIGUORI ROSSNER
Sisters for Christian Community
Bloomfield"


Thank you for doing your part Sister Liguori, since we all know it takes a village to raise an idiot, and Lord knows Santorum is an idiot!

Something About Sharm El-Sheik?

You know what? I have read about 15 different stories from various papers in the USA and around the world BUT there is one part of the story that all of them seem to leave out of it. Something I have personal experience with concerning Sharm El-Sheik.


If you click on the link (don't forget to watch the 20 second video there!) you might get an idea what I am talking about.


MFO Southcamp


Don't you think this is a MAJOR EFFIN PART OF THE STORY?


MFO Southcamp

The smaller South Camp, near Sharm el Sheikh on the southern tip of the Sinai Peninsula, is situated on a bluff overlooking the Red Sea.� The camp contains all facilities normally required to support a reinforced battalion sized military unit.


I knew as soon as I started scrolling through one story after another that you would not find any of this reported.


US Contingent

The United States Army provides the single largest contingent to the MFO based at both North and South Camp.

The different activities provided by Task Force HQ, Support Battalion and US Battalion are described in the links above.


Why would the MSM care that there are always American soldiers stationed in Sharm?


Is this a part of the story that might of interested you?


Do you really think that tourists were the "only" targets?


I know, I know... A lot of very wealthy Europpean, American, and Middle East OIL magnates go there often. It is a resort town for the extremely FILTHY RICH... But do any of you think that maybe, just maybe, Gambling Saudi princes and tourists were not the only targets?

Monday, July 25, 2005

BTC News � Vermont GOP candidate: Impeach Bush

Just when I was starting to think that there isn't even one honest republican left in this country BTCNEWS had to blow that theory out of the water:

BTC News � Vermont GOP candidate: Impeach Bush:
— weldon berger @ 12:33 pm
Permanent Link

Vermont Republican Dennis Morrisseau wants two things: To fill the House seat being vacated by long-time Congressman Bernie Sanders — Sanders is planning a run for the Senate — and to impeach George W. Bush."


It is pretty funny that there are so few real conservatives in the GOP that are patriotic enough to point out how messed up their party is right now.

The bush legacy of being the "Benedict Arnold administration" is a lock for the history books. Eventualy real conservatives will figure it out.

Morrisseau said he imagines there is a lot of soul-searching going on among the Republicans who continue to support Bush.

“If you’re an old and decent Republican and politics takes a 180 in your country, it sometimes takes a while to tell what you ought to do. It took me a while. I’ve been at this for years.”


Go on over and check out more on this story and others from BTCNEWS.

Wednesday, July 20, 2005

Ronald Reagan on Outing Spies

It appears that Ronnie Raygun's words have come back to haunt the traitors that hero worship him:

Remarks on Signing the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982

Excerpt from the speech delivered by Ronald Reagan:


Whether you work in Langley or a faraway nation, whether your tasks are in operations or analysis sections, it is upon your intellect and integrity, your wit and intuition that the fate of freedom rests for millions of your countrymen and for many millions more all around the globe.

Like those who are part of any silent service, your sacrifices are sometimes unappreciated; your work is sometimes misunderstood. Because you’re professionals, you understand and accept this. But because you’re human and because you deal daily in the dangers that confront this nation, you must sometimes question whether some of your countrymen appreciate the value of your accomplishments, the sacrifices you make, the dangers you confront, the importance of the warnings that you issue.

And that’s why I have come here today; first, to sign an important piece of legislation that bears directly on your work, an act of Congress whose overwhelming passage by the representatives of the American people is a symbol of their support for the job that you do every day. But even more than this, I’ve come here today to say to you what the vast majority of Americans would say if they had this opportunity to stand here before you. We’re grateful to you. We thank you. We’re proud of you.


If you support the treachery of rove and libby than I hold nothing but contempt for you. The potential dangers that these leakers have exposed networks of agents to, and the security risks they have caused for our nation is nothing less than an act of treason.

Yep! Treason...
Reagan is calling y'all on it from his grave there bushies.

But is there more?
Well, yes there is... Here ya go:

The Congress has carefully drafted this bill so that it focuses only on those who would transgress the bounds of decency; not those who would exercise their legitimate right of dissent. This carefully drawn act recognizes that the revelation of the names of secret agents adds nothing to legitimate public debate over intelligence policy. It is also a signal to the world that while we in this democratic nation remain tolerant and flexible, we also retain our good sense and our resolve to protect our own security and that of the brave men and women who serve us in difficult and dangerous intelligence assignments.

During the debate over this bill, some have suggested that our focus should be not on protecting our own intelligence agencies, but on the real or imagined abuses of the past. Well, I'm glad that counsel was rejected, for the days of such abuses are behind us. The Congress now shares the responsibility of guarding against any transgression, and I have named a new Intelligence Oversight Board and Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board to assist me in ensuring that the rule of law is maintained in areas which must remain secret and out of the normal realm of public scrutiny.

Beyond this, I have full confidence that you'll do your job vigorously and imaginatively while making sure that your activity is lawful, constitutional, and in keeping with the traditions of our way of life.
And while you're at your job and while I'm President and while these Congressmen stand at watch, we'll work together to see to it that this powerful tool of government is used to advance, not abuse, the rights of free people.


"The Great Accumulator" (you know? All of that debt Reagan ran up, silly!) must have had his astrologer working overtime that day...

Monday, July 18, 2005

Turdblossm is Wilting...



Why is that mean man scowling? Maybe he just saw the latest post over at Escahaton by Atrios... Looks like turdblossom has willted in America's eyes, and while Atrios got the scoop, well, all bush has left is a heaping pile of poop:

ABC NEWS POLL: THE CIA LEAK INVESTIGATION – 7/17/05 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE


Monday, July 18, 2005 Many Doubt White House CooperationWith Federal Investigation of CIA LeakJust a quarter of Americans think the White House is fully cooperating in the federal investigation of the leak of a CIA operative's identity, a number that's declined sharply since the investigation began. And three-quarters say that if presidential adviser Karl Rove was responsible for leaking classified information, it should cost him his job.


Careful what you step in as you follow the treason of rove Atrios... You don't want to come out of it smelling like the Benedict Arnold administration in the White House right now... (If your cats are anything like my dog... There is always the chance of finding a bush turd on the living room floor the hard way! lol)

Saturday, July 16, 2005

Help Make IWT Your News Source!

Independent World Television





IWTnews is proud to present some brand new video content-- an interview with IWTnews Founding Committee member Mark Lloyd. A senior fellow at the Center for American Progress and a former NBC and CNN producer, Mr. Lloyd talks about the death of investigative TV news reporting, the need for greater diversity in media, and his hopes for building a better network. Watch the video now


Go ahead... I'll still be here for you...

This is a great opportunity for everyone here to help get a news source off the ground that has:




    No corporate funding!

    No corporate underwriting!

    No government funding!


Just honest investigative reporting, business and political coverage, and other real news from around the world that is funded only by you! And responsible to no one else but you!


You know you want this... God knows, WE NEED THIS!


Check out the NEW Video...


Check out their intro video...

(If you missed it the first time around?)


Take the survey...


Poke around their Web site and see if it is all I am talking about. They really want to know what YOU think, and they really want your help in getting this going.


With the option of watching "news" from Fox or "Foxlite" (CNN) what do you really have to lose by just checking this out? The more sources we can get out there that undercut the corporate news networks... The more all stations will be forced to deal with news in a less biased way.


If you have gotten all the way down here and haven't checked the site out yet... What are you waiting for?


Click on the image damnit!






Fork You Rove!

Here is the text... Read it all... There is no exception for disclosing classified info even if you only confirm a previous source. It is illegal. And they are "trained" to know this before they to get any security clearance.

They are so detailed in this training that even confirming classified info to a news source is a part of that training, and it is definately a no-no.


REP. HENRY A. WAXMAN
RANKING MINORITY MEMBER
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
JULY 15, 2005


Fact Sheet
Karl Rove’s Nondisclosure Agreement


Today, news reports revealed that Karl Rove, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff and the President’s top political advisor, confirmed the identity of covert CIA official Valerie Plame Wilson with Robert Novak on July 8, 2003, six days before Mr. Novak published the information in a nationally syndicated column. These new disclosures have obvious relevance to the criminal investigation of Patrick Fitzgerald, the Special Counsel who is investigating whether Mr. Rove violated a criminal statute by revealing Ms. Wilson’s identity as a covert CIA official.


Independent of the relevance these new disclosures have to Mr. Fitzgerald’s investigation, they also have significant implications for: (1) whether Mr. Rove violated his obligations under his "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement" and (2) whether the White House violated its obligations under Executive Order 12958. Under the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order, Mr. Rove would be subject to the loss of his security clearance or dismissal even for "negligently" disclosing Ms. Wilson’s identity.


KARL ROVE’S NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT


Executive Order 12958 governs how federal employees are awarded security clearances in order to obtain access to classified information. It was last updated by President George W. Bush on March 25, 2003, although it has existed in some form since the Truman era. The executive order applies to any entity within the executive branch that comes into possession of classified information, including the White House. It requires employees to undergo a criminal background check, obtain training on how to protect classified information, and sign a "Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement," also known as a SF-312, promising not to reveal classified information.1


The nondisclosure agreement signed by White House officials such as Mr. Rove states: "I will never divulge classified information to anyone" who is not authorized to receive it.2


THE PROHIBITION AGAINST "CONFIRMING" CLASSIFIED INFORMATION


Mr. Rove, through his attorney, has raised the implication that there is a distinction between classified information to someone not authorized to receive it and confirming classified information from someone not authorized to have it. In fact, there is no such distinction under the nondisclosure agreement Mr. Rove signed.

One of the most basic rules of safeguarding classified information is that an official who has signed a nondisclosure agreement cannot confirm classified information obtained by a reporter.


In fact, this obligation is highlighted in the "briefing booklet" that new security clearance recipients receive when they sign their nondisclosure agreements: Before … confirming the accuracy of what appears in the public source, the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified. If it has not, … confirmation of its accuracy is also an unauthorized disclosure.3


THE INDEPENDENT DUTY TO VERIFY THE CLASSIFIED STATUS OF INFORMATION


Mr. Rove’s attorney has implied that if Mr. Rove learned Ms. Wilson’s identity and occupation from a reporter, this somehow makes a difference in what he can say about the information. This is inaccurate.


The executive order states: "Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information."4


Mr. Rove was not at liberty to repeat classified information he may have learned from a reporter Instead, he had an affirmative obligation to determine whether the information had been declassified before repeating it. The briefing booklet is explicit on this point: "before disseminating the information elsewhere … the signer of the SF 312 must confirm through an authorized official that the information has, in fact, been declassified."5


"NEGLIGENT" DISCLOSURE OF CLASSIFIED INFORMATION


Mr. Rove’s attorney has also implied that Mr. Rove’s conduct should be at issue only if he intentionally or knowingly disclosed Ms. Wilson’s covert status. In fact, the nondisclosure agreement and the executive order require sanctions against security clearance holders who "knowingly, willfully, or negligently" disclose classified information.6 The sanctions for such a breach include "reprimand, suspension without pay, removal, termination of classification authority, loss or denial of access to classified information, or other sanctions."7


THE WHITE HOUSE OBLIGATIONS UNDER EXECUTIVE ORDER 12958


Under the executive order, the White House has an affirmative obligation to investigate and take remedial action separate and apart from any ongoing criminal investigation. The executive order specifically provides that when a breach occurs, each agency must "take appropriate and prompt corrective action."8


This includes a determination of whether individual employees improperly disseminated or obtained access to classified information The executive order further provides that sanctions for violations are not optional.


The executive order expressly provides: "Officers and employees of the United States Government … shall be subject to appropriate sanctions if they knowingly, willfully, or negligently … disclose to unauthorized persons information properly classified."9


There is no evidence that the White House complied with these requirements.



ENDNOTES

1 Executive Order No. 12958, Classified National Security Information (as amended), sec. 4.1(a) (Mar.28, 2003) (online at Web reference).


2 Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, Standard Form 312 (Prescribed by NARA/ISOO) (32 C.F.R. 2003, E.O. 12958) (online at Web reference).

3 Information Security Oversight Office, National Archives and Records Administration, Briefing

Booklet: Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement (Standard Form 312), at 73 (emphasis added)(online at Web reference ).

4 Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 1.1(b).

5 Briefing Booklet, supra note 3, at 73.

6 Executive Order No. 12958, sec. 5.5(b) (emphasis added).

7 Id. at 5.5(c).

8 Id. at 5.5(e)(1).

9 Id. at 5.5(b).



Stick a fork in rove...
YEP...
He is done.


Now what we need to know from cheney and bush?

What did you know AND when did you know it?

And while I am at it...
How friendly were you with Jeff Gannon?
Wink wink
(Hey, Gannon had to be screwing some guy in the White House?)