Mr. David Corn,

More good work!

Thanks

Kirk

Mr. Corn:

Bono is at least part political animal because he has the facility for making powerful people feel bad. He brings it home to them that they haven't done what they know they can to alleviate the poverty and suffering endemic to the use of power in the world. I don't doubt he could easily be elected to an office of his choice.

I continue to appreciate your insightful posts.

Iran wins big in Iraq's elections

According to reports, early returns show a strong performance by the followers of the outspoken Shi'ite cleric, Muqtada al-Sadr, on the UIA slate. Some reports estimate Muqtada's nominees winning almost one third of the UIA slate.

Worse still for the US, the "Sunni factor" choreographed by the American viceroys also seems to have come up with surprises. Al-Hayat newspaper commented that the two Sunni politicians who would appear to have done extremely well were Islamist leader Adnan Dulaimi and Ba'athist leader Salih al-Mutlak. (The latter is already being billed as the "Gerry Adams of Iraq", a reference to the mercurial Sinn Fein leader.)

Moreover, former members of the Ba'ath Party and other militia leaders have lost no time asserting that despite the Sunni participation in the elections, their armed resistance to the American military occupation would be resumed. (Since the elections, 10 Iraqis, including five police officers and an American, have been killed.)

Al-Hayat quoted a Ba'ath communique condemning the elections as an American plot to divide Iraq along ethnic and religious lines and vowing that resistance would not end until US troops left Iraqi soil. So much for the delicate distinction that American spokesmen were making between "Ba'athists" and "Saddamists".

With the ascendancy of Muqtada and Mutlak in the fragmented political spectrum, the calls for American troops to leave Iraq can be expected to become more strident. In the new climate, the incoming parliament itself may well make such a formal demand on the Americans. The hurried visit by US Vice President Dick Cheney to Baghdad on Sunday, his first ever since the US invasion in 2003, underscores the disarray surfacing in Washington.

Iran has, therefore, every reason to be pleased with the outcome of the election. Tehran sees that Iraq is now irreversibly on the verge of profound change, and transition is already in the air. The US is increasingly finding that it must come up with a clear plan to withdraw its troops from Iraq. As prominent Lebanese political observer Rami Khouri wrote on Saturday, "Starting the American military retreat from Iraq is important because American troops will continue to be a divisive and destabilizing force, just as the American military presence in Saudi Arabia after the 1991 war was a major provocation leading to Osama bin Laden-type resistance and terror."

*****end of clip*****

If Iran is a nuclear concern we should have never lied about WMD’s to invade Iraq.

Iran mines uranium - HERE - so the idea that we should have a grave concern what they might do with it is a given.

A military attack by the USA or Israel cannot change the potential unless such an attack is followed by occupation. That is the real plan to expand the war on terror.

Uranium is a natural resource in Iran.

The question is how much control do we want the UN to have over the USA. Any enforcement based on a countries intentions can be turned on any country. Rules about having nuclear weapons have no validity if they are randomly enforced based on our opinion of that countries leadership at any given moment.

So the question is: are we ready to occupy Iran? Are we ready to enforce the same rules on ourselves, Israel or the UK or EU? Do the "rules" apply to every country except ours?

capt

Maybe it's me but super wealthy can seem very charitable with the huge tax cuts they have received from Bush and his cabal. Much of the money they gave in charity was my money and the many Cornposters who did not get a tax break so I would like people and the world to thank me and the Cornposters for our charitable deeds.

capt, Iran will feel Bush's wrath with a preemptive nuclear attack.

In March Iran allegedly will begin trading oil in euros (just as Saddam was going to do). In the spring the focus of the next AIPAC conference in Wash D.C. will again be Iran.

It is Israel's comfort with striking first that many in this country do not want to talk about.

At last, recognition and respect

As he prepares to enter a civil partnership, Jerome Farrell celebrates a long overdue change in British law

Monday December 19, 2005

Wednesday is the first day on which lesbian and gay couples in England and Wales will be able to register their partnerships, and Ray and I will be among the first in our west London borough to register.

The civil partnership law was actually passed in November 2004 - despite the usual tactics in the Lords to try and wreck it - but a lead-in period of around a year was needed to make the changes and preparations necessary for it to be implemented throughout the country.

*****end of clip*****

That's it, all of the straight couples will have to divorce. The institution of marriage violated and laid to ruin! Another country has made their stealth attack on our neo-theocracy.

Then again maybe all of the couples across the globe will get up, share a loving gaze and say "mornin' hun" and those of us lucky enough to have water will make some coffee!

capt

Capt,

Elton John's going back to the UK to get hitched!
I say...Congrats to you all!

-T

Capt #3

We can't be nearly ready to occupy Iran; we haven't even started fixing the Army after their ill-fated use in Iraq.

In regard to how the UN should look at the USA, if our political philosophy of "one person, one vote" and our altruistic ideal of "equality under law" mean anything, we should rather demand of the UN that we be treated on a par with Bolivia or Indonesia or Tibet.

Have water, heat, phone and internets now...btw.

Lots of stockpiled wood, right on the back porch too, btw. Was planning for another 4 days or so.

those who hug me, are thankful that I can now shower. Dogs were faithfully indifferent!

-T

Have water, heat, phone and internets now...btw

Right on!

capt

#10
Ewwwwwwa!

David,
Can you see if you can find a pissed off girlfriend or boyfriend, husband, wife, aunt, cousin, whoever - who is somehow involved with with Sibel Edmunds story. That's the hot story.

Kathleen, Israel is what no one wants to talk about. And can you blame them? 5 years in prison is a mighty stiff sentence for the crime of disagreement, especially when you aren't allowed to present your evidence.
Hajji, glad you're back. We had our first major snow here, 8 inches at my house, more to come. I miss summer already.
Jeanne, Sibel is a forbidden subject. You don't want to get too close to the fire, you WILL get burned.

ha! the cia factbook ~ there's an oxymoron if I've ever seen one!

Each year, sixteen million gallons of oil run off pavement into streams, rivers and eventually oceans in the United States. This is more oil than was spilled by the Exxon Valdez.

Bush's Snoopgate
The president was so desperate to kill The New York Times' eavesdropping story, he summoned the paper's editor and publisher to the Oval Office. But it wasn’¥ just out of concern about national security.

The problem was not that the disclosures would compromise national security, as Bush claimed at his press conference. His comparison to the damaging pre-9/11 revelation of Osama bin Laden's use of a satellite phone, which caused bin Laden to change tactics, is fallacious; any Americans with ties to Muslim extremists - in fact, all American Muslims, period- have long since suspected that the U.S. government might be listening in to their conversations. Bush claimed that "The fact that we are discussing this program is helping the enemy." But there is simply no evidence, or even reasonable presumption, that this is so. And rather than the leaking being a "shameful act," it was the work of a patriot inside the government who was trying to stop a presidential power grab.

No, Bush was desperate to keep the Times from running this important story- which the paper had already inexplicably held for a year- because he knew that it would reveal him as a law-breaker. He insists he had "legal authority derived from the Constitution and congressional resolution authorizing force." But the Constitution explicitly requires the president to obey the law. And the post 9/11 congressional resolution authorizing "All necessary force" in fighting terrorism was made in clear reference to military intervention. It did not scrap the Constitution and allow the president to do whatever he pleased in any area in the name of fighting terrorism.

What is especially perplexing about this story is that the 1978 law set up a special court to approve eavesdropping in hours, even minutes, if necessary. In fact, the law allows the government to eavesdrop on its own, then retroactively justify it to the court, essentially obtaining a warrant after the fact. Since 1979, the FISA court has approved tens of thousands of eavesdropping requests and rejected only four. There was no indication the existing system was slow- as the president seemed to claim in his press conference-or in any way required extra-constitutional action.
------------------------
Neck deep in the muck and still claiming he's dry.

CONTACT YOUR SENATORS NOW!

They vote very soon!

ANWR failed in the energy bill.
ANWR failed in the budget bill.

Now they are trying to blackmail Senators into voting for it the defense bill. The military and katrina victims are going to make it hard to stop, but it must be. They are hellbent on turning our public lands into a multinational corporate firesale. And who is going to pay for that glorious pipeline? Not the corporations. They'll borrow more, or sell it off to Asia, like they do with the oil coming out of the North Slope. If you have a Dem Senator or a moderate Repub, make sure they know you support their nay.

on sibel edmonds sibel confirmed it herself

#16 I was just going to post that link to Jonathan Alter's story -- it makes one wonder just HOW CLOSE is the NYT to the bushevik administration? Very close.

No wonder bush has been on his snake oil tour trying to scare up support for his dictatorship's policies.

Reports Jonathan Alter: "No wonder Bush was so desperate that The New York Times not publish its story on the National Security Agency eavesdropping on American citizens without a warrant, in what lawyers outside the administration say is a clear violation of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. I learned this week that on December 6, Bush summoned Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger and executive editor Bill Keller to the Oval Office in a futile attempt to talk them out of running the story. The Times will not comment on the meeting, but one can only imagine the president’s desperation."

With this latest revelation about the NYT going off the reservation, things are going to get really ugly. President Jumpy Jaw is going to be hard to rein in.

Happy holidays.

State Supreme Court versus the U.S. Supreme Court

In an earlier post, I mentioned that the Supreme Court voted to protect hot dog companies over the citizens of the USA. They voted that more filler and less quality meat in hot dogs were acceptable. With decisions like the hot dog vote the Supreme Court should not have the responsibility to control American lives with their incestuous relationships with corporate America.

Raping of Americans is a dastardly act from dastardly justices. 300 million people must be protected from the Supreme Court and corporate America. Corporate America in conjunction with the Supreme Court are placing Americans at risk with irresponsible decisions.

It is my firm belief that the U.S. Supreme Court is now irrelevant as we enter the twenty-first century. State Supreme Courts have a place because they rule for the people whose states have like 42 million citizens in California and maybe a million citizens in certain states. State Supreme Courts are closer to the people. The U.S. Supreme Court is closer to corporate America and their incestuous relationships.

Have Bush's speeches changed your opinion about Iraq?
No 45%
Yes, I've become more positive about it 31%
Yes, I've become more negative about it 23%
Total Votes: 223,062

How different have these speeches been from previous Iraq speeches?
Not at all 53%
Somewhat 28%
Very 19%
Total Votes: 219,438

''[By withdrawing now] we would... signal to the world that America cannot be trusted to keep its word.''
Do you agree with this statement?
No 55%
Yes 45%
Total Votes: 203,625

How confident are you that Bush can fix intelligence problems?
Not at all 65%
Very 22%
Somewhat 13%
Total Votes: 95,282

'By fighting the terrorists in Iraq, we are confronting a direct threat to the American people.''
Do you agree with this statement?
No 64%
Yes 36%
Total Votes: 94,520

Are you more optimistic or pessimistic about rebuilding Iraq?
Pessimistic 66%
Optimistic 34%
Total Votes: 93,079

How confident are you in Iraqi security forces?
Not at all 58%
Somewhat 31%
Very 12%
Total Votes: 91,372

Do you support the spying program Bush is defending?
No 62%
Yes 38%

How well are we doing in the war on terror?
Not at all 48%
Somewhat 28%
Very 24%
Total Votes: 174,953

38% SUPPORT the spying program? Heil Hitler!

In regard to the wiretapping issue, Sean posted (#117 Previous thread) : “I presume none of you can deny that our country has NOT had a domestic attack worthy of news!” We often hear this same argument in regard to torture and many other “ends justify the means” issues. Sean and others try to claim that such methods are effective (and therefore justified) because no further terrorist attacks have taken place on US soil.
This statement is wrong on so many levels it’s almost hard to know where to begin. First of all, it falls into the logical fallacy of “post hoc, propter hoc” (after the fact, therefore because of the fact). This is an especially egregious error when the so-called result is not an action but the absence of an action. It reminds me of the old kiddie joke about the guy who was asked why he was doing a crazy dance. He replied, “This is to keep away the wild elephants.” “But that’s silly,” said the other guy. “There aren’t any wild elephants within 100s of miles from here.” “See, it’s working!”
Secondly, if this statement is valid today because no further terror attacks on US soil have taken place since Sept. 11, 2001, then the same statement would have been valid in regard to whatever anti-terror measures were in place up to Sept. 11, 2001. After all, until then, no further terror attacks had taken place on US soil since the previous one. No attacks happened…until they happened. And no further attacks will happen… until they happen.
Thirdly, the implication of this statement is that the techniques in question (whether torture, wiretapping of US citizens without a warrant, or whatever) have been effective in gaining information which actually prevented some planned further attack on US soil. But if that’s true, isn’t it logical to expect that the same techniques would have gleaned some information in regard to the other terrorist attacks that did take place, outside of US soil? It’s the same terrorists who are being interrogated or listened to. Did we miss or ignore the indications that would have prevented the bombings in Madrid, London, Bali, Jordan and other places?

I've been fighting the urge to puke, sitting here watching Chain-ee on the late "Nightline" show (cause of the f'ball game). Terry Moran has been grilling him pretty good, but of course the answers he gets have nothing to do with the hard questions. Some questions Chain-ee answered with a flat-out "I'm not going to answer any 'intelligence' questions. Just now he "respectfully declined to talk about that when asked about Valerie Plame.
It's still on if anybody's awake.

#14 James, I've had that link in my favs for years. There's alotta good info in there. I'm sure there's some propaganda too, but still a good reference for many things.

#25 - Steve


good job on demonstrating the fallacy behind such an argument.

#22 - Gerald


Interesting angle. As much as I have argued in this forum that federalism has a role to bring about positive change such as enforcing the civil rights act in the south, I also increasingly see the need for states to step in to protect the individuals.

Most corporations are chartered under some state law and yet states do not keep these corporations accountable to their charters. In theory, a state could tell a company like Exxon that they are no longer beneficial to state/country especially if they are found criminally guilty and yank their charter.

I recall a recent editorial/blog that argued for dividing up the state of california into many small states (not just two). Then each state would get their own set of senators, and there would be so many that PACs and other special interest groups would not have it so easy in getting influence since it would not be so centralized. I know this hyperbolic but it was an interesting thought if one wants to weaken the grasp of lobbyists... that and removing term limits. Even Pete Wilson in California has said that he regretted pushing that proposition/ammendment into the voter's hands... the lobbyists become more powerful as the elected officials rely on them for needed knowledge and also to fill up their campaign coffers as they jump to another office (e.g. assemblyman becoming state senator, later a state-wide office, maybe later US senator, etc). None of them can say I want to become the argricultral expert in the assembly, because they will be forced to leave in 6 years even if their district overwhelmingly wants to keep him in office.

Alan Dershowitz: Bush the Law

*noted law scholar pipes in

Good article by Larry Johnson

Roving Wiretaps Capture a Terrorist

last graf was very interesting...

So, President Bush is wrong. You don't have to break a law to get quick action. Not only can you catch terrorists using FISA, we have caught terrorists. The real story behind the unauthorized wiretaps authorized by President Bush probably concerns the source of the info. It appears the most likely explanation is that the Bush Administration did not want to have to tell a Federal judge that they were using information obtained from interrogations that violated the spirit and the letter of the Geneva Conventions. Instead of protecting the nation the President may be covering his derrier.

Posted by Larry Johnson on December 19, 2005 at 08:22 PM

The Air of Legitmacy

The Bush Admin states that their secret snooping program is legitimate because of their consulting with a few senators about the program. Where their definition of consulting is to inform them, possibly listen to their responses, and not allow them to speak to anyone else about the program (even if to seek after a legal scholar), and otherwise be under no sense of accountability to congress or the judicial branch.

What more can these consultations have been other then the president's admin seeking to cloak an illegal action with an air of legitimacy, if such rumors or news breaks out. These consultations were so devoid of merit or farcical that most ceremonial customs carry more meaning like the president putting his hand on the bible as he takes the oath of office.

Fareed Zakaria documents in his illegimate democracy book, how even dictators use the cloak of democractic elections to give them an aire of legitimacy with the rest of the world, even though their elections are shams.... but it legitimazes their power and often gives enough ammo for allied nations and corporations to justify their cronyism with would otherwise a dictator.

The Air of Legitmacy

The Bush Admin states that their secret snooping program is legitimate because of their consulting with a few senators about the program. Where their definition of consulting is to inform them, possibly listen to their responses, and not allow them to speak to anyone else about the program (even if to seek after a legal scholar), and otherwise be under no sense of accountability to congress or the judicial branch.

What more can these consultations have been other then the president's admin seeking to cloak an illegal action with an air of legitimacy, if such rumors or news breaks out. These consultations were so devoid of merit or farcical that most ceremonial customs carry more meaning like the president putting his hand on the bible as he takes the oath of office.

Fareed Zakaria documents in his illegimate democracy book, how even dictators use the cloak of democractic elections to give them an aire of legitimacy with the rest of the world, even though their elections are shams.... but it legitimazes their power and often gives enough ammo for allied nations and corporations to justify their cronyism with would otherwise a dictator.

F.B.I. Watched Activist Groups, New Files Show

Rockwell

Somebody's Watching Me

by N/A
Who's watching
Tell me who's watching
Who's watching me

I'm just an average man with an average life
I work from 9 to 5, hey hell, I pay the price
All I want is to be left alone, in my average home
But why do I always feel
Like I'm in the Twilight Zone? and...

I always feel like somebody's watching me
And I have no privacy, whoa-oa-oa
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Tell me, is it just a dream

When I come home at night
I bang the door real tight
People call me on the phone I'm trying to avoid
Or can the people on TV see me, or am I just paranoid?
When I'm in the shower, I'm afraid to wash my hair
Cause I might open my eyes and find someone standing there!
People say I'm crazy, just a little touch
But maybe showers remind me of "Psycho" too much
That's why...

I always feel like somebody's watching me
And I have no privacy, whoa-oa-oa
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Who's playing tricks on me?

Who's watching me
I don't know anymore!
Are the neighbours watching me?
Who's watching
Well is the mailman watching me?
Tell me who's watching
And I don't feel safe anymore, oh what a mess
I wonder who's watching me now
Who?
The IRS?!

I always feel like somebody's watching me
And I have no privacy, whoa-oa-oa
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Tell me is it just a dream
I always feel like somebody's watching me
And I have no privacy, whoa-oa-oa
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Who's playing tricks on me?
Who's watching me?
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Oooh, whoa-oa-oa
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Tell me, can it be?
Who's watching me?
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Whoa-oa-oa
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Who's playing tricks on me?
Who's watching me?
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Can I have my privacy
I always feel like somebody's watching me
Who's playing tricks on me?

FBI, ATF address domestic terrorism

Officials: Extremists pose serious threat

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Violent animal rights extremists and eco-terrorists now pose one of the most serious terrorism threats to the nation, top federal law enforcement officials say.

Senior officials from the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms (ATF) and Explosives told a Senate panel Wednesday of their growing concern over these groups.

Of particular concern are the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and the Earth Liberation Front (ELF).

John Lewis, the FBI's deputy assistant director for counterterrorism, said animal and environmental rights extremists have claimed credit for more than 1,200 criminal incidents since 1990. The FBI has 150 pending investigations associated with animal rights or eco-terrorist activities, and ATF officials say they have opened 58 investigations in the past six years related to violence attributed to the ELF and ALF.

In the same period violence from groups like the Ku Klux Klan and anti-abortion extremists have declined, Lewis said.

The ELF has been linked to fires set at sport utility vehicle dealerships and construction sites in various states, while the ALF has been blamed for arson and bombings against animal research labs and the pharmaceutical and cosmetics industry.

No deaths have been blamed on attacks by those groups so far, but the attacks have increased in frequency and size, said Lewis.

*****end of clip*****

An old piece from May. Seems a bit odd that the most serious domestic threat is from animal activists.

Seems like the FBI and the government just ignores the domestic threat of neo-nazis and white supremacists. I can only conclude we have won the war on racism and all of the potential Tim McViegh's are converted to thoughtful citizens and are no longer any kind of a threat?

capt

Hajji,

Um. . . recent satellite photos of your compound show a quadruped wearing a pink housecoat with a ruffled collar.

Can you offer an explanation?

capt

Capt,

Lipstick on a pig is nuttin' compared to eyeshadow on a donkey!

-T

What is better than roses on your piano?

Tulips on your organ!

Wink, wink!

capt

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): "I Don’t Know Of Any Legal Basis" For Bush’s Secret Spying Program

It’s not just liberals who are suggesting that Bush’s secret domestic spying program was illegal. Here is conservative Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) this morning on :SCHIEFFER:%20The%20Secretary%20of%20State%20said%20this%20morning%20that%20the%20president%20has%20statutory%20and%20constitutional%20authorization%20to%20do%20what%20he%20did.%20So%20I’ll%20start%20with%20Senator%20Graham.%20Does%20he%20have%20that%20authority,%20Senator?

LINDSEY GRAHAM: If he has the authority to go around the FISA court, which is a court to accommodate the law of the war of terror, the FISA Act was–created a court set up by the chief justice of the United States to allow a rapid response to requests for surveillance activity in the war on terror. I don’t know of any legal basis to go around that. There may be some, but I’m not aware of it. And here’s the concern I have. We can’t become an outcome-based democracy. Even in a time of war, you have to follow the process, because that’s what a democracy is all about: a process.

Graham isn’t the only conservative Senator concerned. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), the chairman of the judiciary committee, said "there is no doubt that this is inappropriate" and promised to hold hearings next year.

*****end of clip*****

Even Think Progress seems to reinforce the "liberal" label for anybody in the opposition. We need a new nomenclature and an expanded lexicon to express the understanding that Rebpulican is not conservative and those who oppose this misadministration are not liberals.

It is real American patriots that oppose Bush and traitors that support him.

capt

Sorry about that - this is the correct version:

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC): "I Don't Know Of Any Legal Basis" For Bush's Secret Spying Program

It's not just liberals who are suggesting that Bush's secret domestic spying program was illegal. Here is conservative Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) this morning on Face the Nation

LINDSEY GRAHAM: If he has the authority to go around the FISA court, which is a court to accommodate the law of the war of terror, the FISA Act wasn't reated a court set up by the chief justice of the United States to allow a rapid response to requests for surveillance activity in the war on terror. I don't know of any legal basis to go around that. There may be some, but I'm not aware of it. And here's the concern I have. We can’¥ become an outcome-based democracy. Even in a time of war, you have to follow the process, because that's what a democracy is all about: a process.

Graham isn't the only conservative Senator concerned. Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), the chairman of the judiciary committee, said "there is no doubt that this is inappropriate" and promised to hold hearings next year.

*****end of clip*****

Even Think Progress seems to reinforce the "liberal" label for anybody in the opposition. We need a new nomenclature and an expanded lexicon to express the understanding that Rebpulican is not conservative and those who oppose this misadministration are not liberals.

It is just patriots that oppose Bush and traitors that support him.

capt

Nationwide Spying Could Have Averted 911: Cheney

"We would have known not to stand the USAirforce down that day"

COMPUTER HAIKUs

The web site you seek
Cannot be located but
Countless more exist.

Stay the patient course.
Of little worth is your ire.
The network is down.

9/11 will continue to be the excuse for the steady erosion of everything that ever made this country great unless it is drug out of the dungeon and into the light of day. cheney can say what he wants, all the wire tapping in the world cannot stop the govt. from doing whatever they decide is necessary for their global aspirations. As long as people continue to live in fear of non-existent, cave dwelling terrorists out to do us harm, rather than facing the real threat that the rulers are the ones carrying out this steady destruction of freedom, all the citizens of all the countries around the world will be helpless to stop what is increasingly becoming ineviable. 9/11 is the crux of all the atrocities being carried out in our names, and will continue to be as long as America turns a blind eye to the truth.

The Social Security Death Index, and the September 11th Victim's Compensation Fund.

Some very interesting numbers.

The Social Security Death Index (SSDI) (Social Security Death Index) is a privately-owned website that is not affiliated with Social Security. It boasts an accuracy rate of about 83% (e-mail them any questions you may have).

Flight 11: of the 92 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 20 are listed in the SSDI (22%)

Of these 20 people, only three are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

Judy Larocque
Laurie Neira
Candace Lee Williams
---------------

Flight 77: of the 64 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 14 are listed in the SSDI (22%)

Of these 64 people, only five on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

William Caswell
Eddie Dillard
Ian Gray
John Sammartino
Leonard Taylor
-----------------

Flight 175: of the 65 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 18 are listed in the SSDI (28%)

Of these 65 people, only three are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

Michael C. Tarrou
Gloria Debarrera
Timothy Ward
-----------------

Flight 93: of the 45 people who are listed as dying on this flight, only 6 are listed in the SSDI (13%)

Of these 45 people, none are on the 9-11 Compensation Fund list:

No one
---------------

Of the passengers and crew of Flight 11, 77, 175 & 93, only 22%, 22%, 28%, 13% respectively are in the SSDI.

Of the 266 people that we were told died on these jets, only 11 relatives applied for compensation.

(The minimum federal award was $250,000, and the average pay-out was about $1.8 million. The recipients only had to make an agreement: they couldn't sue the airlines.)

Are we to believe that most of these people turned down a million bucks? What is wrong with this picture??

#25
Steve wrote - But if that's true, isn't it logical to expect that the same techniques would have gleaned some information in regard to the other terrorist attacks that did take place, outside of US soil? It's the same terrorists who are being interrogated or listened to. Did we miss or ignore the indications that would have prevented the bombings in Madrid, London, Bali, Jordan and other places? -
-----------
Very good point.

Jeanne, some people DID receive warnings before these attacks. Why weren't they passed on? The attack in Jordan comes to mind. All the Israelis were evacuated but they didn't bother to warn anyone else.

#29
Alan,
Thank you for posting that. Very interesting.

#46
We are becoming a world of isolationists. Each country or group cares only about their little group. This makes for a very dangerous world.

Judge Rules Against Pa. Biology Curriculum

HARRISBURG, Pa. - "Intelligent design" cannot be mentioned in biology classes in a Pennsylvania public school district, a federal judge said Tuesday, ruling in one of the biggest courtroom clashes on evolution since the 1925 Scopes trial.

Dover Area School Board members violated the Constitution when they ordered that its biology curriculum must include the notion that life on Earth was produced by an unidentified intelligent cause, U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III said. Several members repeatedly lied to cover their motives even while professing religious beliefs, he said.

The school board policy, adopted in October 2004, was believed to have been the first of its kind in the nation.

"The citizens of the Dover area were poorly served by the members of the Board who voted for the ID Policy," Jones wrote.

*****end of clip*****

A small but important win for science.

capt

#49
Capt,
Isn't it amazing how these rightous Christians were lying and going behind the backs of the people. This tells me it's all about power. I want it passed therefore it's ok to do what I need to do to get it passed. In their mind it's do as I say not as I do. Kind of like the...hmmm..the white house.

7/7 Final Final Word: British Intelligence Inside Operation

Steve Watson | December 19 2005

With the major stories of torture/rendition and spying on US citizens, one important revelation has slipped away virtually unnoticed - the fact that the Blair Government and the British Intelligence services had prior knowledge of the London bombings on July 7th of this year.

The London Times reported last weekend that MI5 and MI6 had specifically warned Tony Blair before the July 7 suicide bombings that Al-Qaeda was planning a high priority attack specifically aimed at the London underground system.

The source is a leaked four-page report by the Joint Intelligence Committee (JIC), signed off by the heads of MI5, MI6 and GCHQ, the government eavesdropping centre.

Furthermore, the intelligence services were aware of the "bombers" and had them under surveillance 18 months prior to the attack. The simply decided to "stop monitoring" them.

Is it any coincidence then that last week, Blair ruled out a public inquiry on the grounds that it would detract from the ongoing investigation. The Government is simply going to release a report telling us what happened. This action has been taken because as Blair knows, any independent inquiry would uncover the fact that the specific attack was expected, the suspects were known to British Intelligence and nothing was done to prevent it.

Of course an inquiry would also bring up everything else we have exhaustively documented over the past six months that provide proof positive that British Intelligence had a hand in the attacks with the motive of rallying the people behind draconian new terror laws, a motive that totally failed even though the attack succeeded.

If specific warnings were given why did the MI5 also DOWNGRADE the terror alert level for the first time in four years?

Is it a coincidence that drills were taking place in the exact same sites as the real bombings at exactly the same times? The Intel agencies had warnings of attacks in tube stations, and drills by Visor Consultants for "unnamed clients" were being run in tube stations.

The bombs were sophisticated military type explosives and were ON TIMERS (why would suicide bombers need timers?) Furthermore they were reported to have come from UNDER the trains.
-----------
I don't think "isolationist" quite covers it. They are using these attacks as an excuse to spy on everyday citizens, claiming that it will prevent terrorist attacks. Yet they ignore all the warnings, and actually enable the attacks to occur, then lie and refuse any kind of comprehensive investigation. We are expected to swallow the official story without question. And most people do. WTF is going on here?

Torture's Long Shadow By Vladimir Bukovsky

One nasty morning Comrade Stalin discovered that his favorite pipe was missing. Naturally, he called in his henchman, Lavrenti Beria, and instructed him to find the pipe. A few hours later, Stalin found it in his desk and called off the search. "But, Comrade Stalin," stammered Beria, "five suspects have already confessed to stealing it."

....This is a new debate for Americans, but there is no need for you to reinvent the wheel. Most nations can provide you with volumes on the subject. Indeed, with the exception of the Black Death, torture is the oldest scourge on our planet (hence there are so many conventions against it). Every Russian czar after Peter the Great solemnly abolished torture upon being enthroned, and every time his successor had to abolish it all over again. These czars were hardly bleeding-heart liberals, but long experience in the use of these "interrogation" practices in Russia had taught them that once condoned, torture will destroy their security apparatus. They understood that torture is the professional disease of any investigative machinery.

Apart from sheer frustration and other adrenaline-related emotions, investigators and detectives in hot pursuit have enormous temptation to use force to break the will of their prey because they believe that, metaphorically speaking, they have a "ticking bomb" case on their hands. But, much as a good hunter trains his hounds to bring the game to him rather than eating it, a good ruler has to restrain his henchmen from devouring the prey lest he be left empty-handed. Investigation is a subtle process, requiring patience and fine analytical ability, as well as a skill in cultivating one's sources. When torture is condoned, these rare talented people leave the service, having been outstripped by less gifted colleagues with their quick-fix methods, and the service itself degenerates into a playground for sadists. Thus, in its heyday, Joseph Stalin's notorious NKVD (the Soviet secret police) became nothing more than an army of butchers terrorizing the whole country but incapable of solving the simplest of crimes. And once the NKVD went into high gear, not even Stalin could stop it at will. He finally succeeded only by turning the fury of the NKVD against itself; he ordered his chief NKVD henchman, Nikolai Yezhov (Beria's predecessor), to be arrested together with his closest aides.
------------------------
I haven't read one expert in the field say torture works or is acceptable. So why was it pushed so hard by this administration. No one can answer that either. The only explanation I have heard was they were covering their asses. Let's see how this works...put a law on the books to make torture legal to cover asses and in the process make it possible for the US to continue to torture.

http://billmon.org/

Bush's Snoopgate

The president was so desperate to kill The New York Times eavesdropping story, he summoned the paper's editor and publisher to the Oval Office. But it wasn't just out of concern about national security

What is especially perplexing about this story is that the 1978 law set up a special court to approve eavesdropping in hours, even minutes, if necessary. In fact, the law allows the government to eavesdrop on its own, then retroactively justify it to the court, essentially obtaining a warrant after the fact. Since 1979, the FISA court has approved tens of thousands of eavesdropping requests and rejected only four. There was no indication the existing system was slow's the president seemed to claim in his press conference- or in any way required extra-constitutional action.

This will all play out eventually in congressional committees and in the United States Supreme Court. If the Democrats regain control of Congress, there may even be articles of impeachment introduced. Similar abuse of power was part of the impeachment charge brought against Richard Nixon in 1974.

In the meantime, it is unlikely that Bush will echo President Kennedy in 1961. After JFK managed to tone down a New York Times story by Tad Szulc on the Bay of Pigs invasion, he confided to Times editor Turner Catledge that he wished the paper had printed the whole story because it might have spared him such a stunning defeat in Cuba.

This time, the president knew publication would cause him great embarrassment and trouble for the rest of his presidency. It was for that reason and less out of genuine concern about national security - that George W. Bush tried so hard to kill the New York Times story.

*****end of clip*****

My take on the illegal wiretaps is: Even the MSM will go after Bush on this one. That is why Bush is so worried. Who likes to wonder if they have privacy.

capt

A Time to Impeach

I wrote the following for the forthcoming issue of L.A. Weekly:

When the U.S. Senate last Friday refused to renew the liberticidal Patriot Act -- with its provisions for spying on Americans’†use of libraries and the Internet, among other Constitution-shredding provisions of that iniquitous law -- it was in part because that morning’≥ New York Times had revealed how Bush and his White House had committed a major crime.

By ordering the National Security Agency -- the N.S.A, so secretive that in Washington its initials are said to stand for "No Such Agency" -- to wiretap and eavesdrop on thousands of American citizens without a court order, Bush committed actions specifically forbidden by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Passed in 1978 after the Senate’≥ Church Committee documented in detail the Nixon administration’≥ widespread use of U.S. intelligence agencies to spy on the anti-Vietnam war movement and other political dissidents, FISA "expressly made it a crime for government officials 'acting under color of law' to engage in electronic eavesdropping 'other than pursuant to statute.’¶quot;, as the director of the Center for National Security Studies, Kate Martin, told the Washington Post this past weekend. And the FISA statute required authorization of the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to make such domestic spying legal. Bush and his NSA sought no such authorization before invading American citizens’†right to privacy -- a blatant flouting of the law that made both wavering Democrats and libertarian Republicans mad enough to vote against extending the hideous Patriot Act, which thankfully will now expire at the end of the year.

Bush not only acknowledged, and defended, this illegal eavesdropping in a Saturday radio address, he went further in a Monday morning press conference, saying he’§ "suggested" it. But as Wisconsin Democratic Senator Russ Feingold -- who, together with conservative Idaho Republican Larry Craig, led the filibuster that defeated the Patriot Act’≥ renewal -- said this weekend, "This is not how our democratic system of government works--the president does not get to pick and choose which laws he wants to follow."

*****end of clip*****

Only time will tell
American character
must enforce the law

capt

Capt, I wonder, why all the fuss now? They've been spying on us for over 10 years!

Saladin,

Well when Clinton did it - it was okay because he is not a republican! HA!

capt

Jeanne,

"So why was it pushed so hard by this administration. No one can answer that either. The only explanation I have heard was they were covering their asses."

Torture is VERY effective at getting folks to say what it is you wish to hear.

-T

IS ANTI-ZIONISM ANTI-SEMITISM? THE EXAMPLES OF HANNAH ARENDT AND ALBERT EINSTEIN

Whenever one criticizes the apartheid policies of the Israeli government, or criticizes Zionism as a dangerous form of racial nationalism, one is taxed by the neo-cons, the unconditional Likudniks, and certain neo-liberal Jewish intellectuals with the knee-jerk response, "That's anti-Semitism!" But in such debates it is important to recall some forgotten history -- and Scott Tucker (below right), in his onliine 'zine Open Letter, has usefully done just that, reviving the critiques of Zionism by such prominent Jewish intellectuals as Hannah Arendt (left) and Albert Einstein (right). To quote from Scott's mini-essay (to which I've added some helpful links):

In order to gain some historical perspective on today's ruling versionof Zionism, it helps to remember two facts of immense importance in any discussion of Israel. First, free and far-ranging discussions of Zionism are presently more common in the better Israeli newspapers such as Ha'aretz than in newspapers such as The New York Times or The Los Angeles Times; and second, we would have to isolate Jewish intellectuals such as Albert Einstein, Hannah Arendt and Judah Magnes within the ranks of "anti-Semites" if we insist on making dogmatic judgments about their criticisms of political and state Zionism. In some respects, Noam Chomsky and other Jewish intellectuals are reviving this older critique of state Zionism-- and they have also been slandered in familiar terms.

This is essentialy a debate about nationalism, militarism and human rights. Consequently, this debate is international -- and properly historical. In that spirit, certain passages in Elizabeth Young-Bruehl's biography of Hannah Arendt are worth special attention (Hannah Arendt: For Love of the World, Yale University Press, 1982). Young-Bruehl sought to distinguish the views of Hannah Arendt and Judah Magnes-- but also to emphasize how much they had in common.

*****end of clip*****

A good piece.

capt

#58,

And worse than that Bush admits we went to war on bad intelligence. Intelligence obtained by torture. That means . . .

They WANTED to hear that Saddam had WMD's and other weapons of mass destruction.

capt

I meant to add, the reason they had to torture could only be the result of NOT having any other evidence and no other statements that served their purpose.

Seems the torturers were tasked with providing a specific result. That is not intelligence or even bad intelligence, that is pure fabrication.

Capt,

You win the Kewpie Doll!

We Have a Winnah!!!

-T

Excellent post at #25 above.

The Formula

I am giving you a formula that I believe will bring about justice and peace. Actually, God has given me these ideas directly for a better world. You can accept what I say through Divine Providence or reject what I say. We are all given a free choice. The decision is yours alone.

1. Shalom translated means peace but it is more than peace. Shalom is God's vision of the world. It is God's dream that Shalom comes only to the inclusive embracing community that excludes no one.
2. In each of us there is a Jesus and a Hitler. We should always strive to bring out the Jesus in us.
3. Love is wanting the best for another person or persons.
4. Try to emulate Mother Teresa who saw in each human being the face of Jesus.
5. War is outmoded; no normal person chooses war over peace.
6. From James in the New Testament –†Faith without deeds is worth nothing.
7. Practice your faith that believes in the true God. God wants us to love one another.
8. Read the Bible because it is God's love letter to us.
9. Read Mattie Stepanek's books on Heartsongs.
10. John Kerry says that it is not important for God to be on our side, what is important are we on God's side?
11. Read Matthew 25:31-46! When you do it to the least of my brethren, you do it for me.
12. Read Matthew 5:1-12! The beatitudes!
13. Read Luke 10:25-37! Who is my neighbor?
14. Read Luke 12:13-21! These verses warn us against greed.
15. Be aware of the Just War Theory! Are we in imminent danger?
16. Practice being a Conscientious Objector!
17. St. Ambrose says, "I shall pass this way but once, any good that I can do let me do it now, because I shall not pass this way again."
18. Totus Tuus means all yours. We are all God's children.
19. Paul Wellstone says that politics is not about power. Politics is not only about money. Politics is not about winning for the sake of winning. Politics is about the improvement of people's lives. It is about advancing the cause of peace and justice in our country and in the world. Politics is about doing well for people.
20. Mr. Bourn who built the Filoli Home and Gardens that is south of San Francisco says that we must fight for a just cause; we must love our fellow man; and we must live a good life.
21. When we recite the Lord's Prayer, we are acknowledging that God is the Father and we are all brothers and sisters.
22. The Cross is a sign of contradiction. It is not about death and hatred; it is about life and love.
23. St. Irenaeus says, "The glory of God is man fully alive." Man can only be fully alive when he loves God with his whole mind, body, and soul. And, when he loves his neighbor, as he loves himself.

Many persons will have and will offer various formulas for justice and peace. The end result will center on whether or not we have love and mercy in our hearts. Justice and peace can never move forward unless we have a conversion of the heart.

Leo Buscaglia reminds us that the heart sees what the eyes fail to see. In life we may be called upon to see with our hearts. Our hearts must be filled with love and mercy.

The moral demise of a nation precedes the ultimate demise of a nation. America is in a state of moral demise because Americans do not believe in God. They have chosen the antichrist of money, nuclear weapons, and the words of Bush.

The Formula

I am giving you a formula that I believe will bring about justice and peace. Actually, God has given me these ideas directly for a better world. You can accept what I say through Divine Providence or reject what I say. We are all given a free choice. The decision is yours alone.

1. Shalom translated means peace but it is more than peace. Shalom is God's vision of the world. It is God's dream that Shalom comes only to the inclusive embracing community that excludes no one.
2. In each of us there is a Jesus and a Hitler. We should always strive to bring out the Jesus in us.
3. Love is wanting the best for another person or persons.
4. Try to emulate Mother Teresa who saw in each human being the face of Jesus.
5. War is outmoded; no normal person chooses war over peace.
6. From James in the New Testament –†Faith without deeds is worth nothing.
7. Practice your faith that believes in the true God. God wants us to love one another.
8. Read the Bible because it is God's love letter to us.
9. Read Mattie Stepanek's books on Heartsongs.
10. John Kerry says that it is not important for God to be on our side, what is important are we on God's side?
11. Read Matthew 25:31-46! When you do it to the least of my brethren, you do it for me.
12. Read Matthew 5:1-12! The beatitudes!
13. Read Luke 10:25-37! Who is my neighbor?
14. Read Luke 12:13-21! These verses warn us against greed.
15. Be aware of the Just War Theory! Are we in imminent danger?
16. Practice being a Conscientious Objector!
17. St. Ambrose says, "I shall pass this way but once, any good that I can do let me do it now, because I shall not pass this way again."
18. Totus Tuus means all yours. We are all God's children.
19. Paul Wellstone says that politics is not about power. Politics is not only about money. Politics is not about winning for the sake of winning. Politics is about the improvement of people's lives. It is about advancing the cause of peace and justice in our country and in the world. Politics is about doing well for people.
20. Mr. Bourn who built the Filoli Home and Gardens that is south of San Francisco says that we must fight for a just cause; we must love our fellow man; and we must live a good life.
21. When we recite the Lord's Prayer, we are acknowledging that God is the Father and we are all brothers and sisters.
22. The Cross is a sign of contradiction. It is not about death and hatred; it is about life and love.
23. St. Irenaeus says, "The glory of God is man fully alive." Man can only be fully alive when he loves God with his whole mind, body, and soul. And, when he loves his neighbor, as he loves himself.

Many persons will have and will offer various formulas for justice and peace. The end result will center on whether or not we have love and mercy in our hearts. Justice and peace can never move forward unless we have a conversion of the heart.

Leo Buscaglia reminds us that the heart sees what the eyes fail to see. In life we may be called upon to see with our hearts. Our hearts must be filled with love and mercy.

The moral demise of a nation precedes the ultimate demise of a nation. America is in a state of moral demise because Americans do not believe in God. They have chosen the antichrist of money, nuclear weapons, and the words of Bush.

Remember this?

It was 1987!

At a lecture the other day they were playing an old video of Lt. Col. Oliver North testifying at the Iran-Contra hearings during the Reagan administration.

There was Ollie in front of God and country getting the third degree, but what he said was stunning!

He was being drilled by a senator; "Did you not recently spend close to $60,000 for a home security system?"

Ollie replied, "Yes, I did sir."

The senator continued, trying to get a laugh out of the audience, "Isn't that just a little excessive?"

"No sir," continued Ollie.

"No? And why not?' the senator asked.

"Because the lives of my family and I were threatened, sir."

"Threatened? By whom?" the senator questioned.

"By a terrorist, sir" Ollie answered.

"Terrorist? What terrorist could possibly scare you that much?"

"His name is Osama bin Laden, sir" Ollie replied.

At this point the senator tried to repeat the name, but couldn't pronounce it, which most people back then problably couldn't. A couple of people laughed at the attempt. Then the senator continued. "Why are you so affraid of this man?" the senator asked.

"Because, sir, he is the most evil person alive that I know of", Ollie answered.

"And what do you recommend we do about him?" asked the senator.

"Well, sir, if it was up to me, I would recommend that an assassin team be formed to eliminate him and his men from the face of the earth."

The senator disagreed with this approach, and was all that was shown of the clip.

By the way, that senator was Al Gore.

Also:

Terrorist pilot Mohammad Atta blew up a bus in Isreal in 1986. The israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Isreal had to agree to release so-called "political prisoners."

However, the Isrealis would not release any with blood on their hands. The American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his secretary of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted" that all prisoners be released.

Thus Mohammad Atta was freed and eventually thanked the Clinton administration by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified.

It was censored in the US from later reports.

This folks is the Democrats history on National Defense.

Where is Bush?

There was a poster who thought my post was beautiful but he had hoped that I was wrong about Bush. I cannot be wrong about Bush because Bush has a trail of evil and misadventures. Bush has too much baggage attached to him.

David Corn's book, "The Lies of George W. Bush," is a must read. In his hardcover book the last paragraph on the last page is a must read paragraph. I cannot recall the words. Hopefully, someone who reads this post can share those words with us.

I am going to give you my take on Bush in comparing him with The Formula for justice and peace.

1. Shalom is God's vision of the world that includes all of His children. Bush is only concerned with the rich and the wealthy persons.
2. Bush seems to be concerned with an eternal Hitler within him.
3. Bush only wants the best for rich and wealthy people.
4. Bush does not emulate Mother Teresa. He sees in the poor and middle class in America as cannon fodder to fight in his endless wars.
5. Bush craves to be the war president and to continuously fight his wars. He cherishes the opportunity to have a preemptive nuclear war upon any country he chooses.
6. Bush leaves weak minded people with the impression that he has faith but he does not match faith with good and honorable deeds.
7. Bush does not want us to love one another. He wants to divide us with fear and hatred.
8. I doubt if Bush ever reads the Bible. If he does, he views the Bible as a hate letter and not a love letter.
9. In one of Mattie Stepanek's books he has a letter for Bush. Mattie passed away before his thirteenth birthday. He reveals more intelligence than Bush.
10. Bush says that God speaks through him. His god says to do evil in America and throughout the world. Bush and his cabal prowl the earth seeking the ruin of souls.
11. Bush does not do to the least Americans. He hates the poor and the middle class. They are only cannon fodder to him.
12. Bush is not a peacemaker. He wants endless wars.
13. Bush does not know the poor and the middle class. He is only concerned for the rich and the wealthy neighbors.
14. Bush gives to the rich and wealthy and he takes away from the poor and the middle class.
15. We were not in imminent danger against Iraq. Bush is a murderer and a war criminal.
16. We must practice being peacemakers and oppose wars. Bush does not want conscientious objectors. He wants cannon fodder to fight in his endless wars.
17. Even though Bush will live only once, he is not practicing good deeds for the people.
18. Bush is all for himself, the rich, and the wealthy.
19. Bush does not practice Paul Wellstone's politics.
20. Bush does not follow Mr. Bourn's philosophy and the name that he gave to the Filoli Home.
21. Bush does not know the meaning of the Lord's Prayer that we are all brothers and sisters in God.
22. Bush does not view The Cross as assign of life and love. The cross for Bush is to place upon cannon fodder's graves in fighting his endless wars.
23. For Bush the glory of man is to be dead cannon fodder in fighting Bush’≥ endless wars.

Bush has never had a conversion of the heart and so he perpetuates murders and war crimes. Bush is part of the antichrist of money, nuclear weapons, and his practices and policies of evil.

Make Your Freedom of Information Act Request

George Bush is using the National Security Agency to conduct surveillance on American citizens without the consent of any court. After initially refusing to confirm the story, the President has admitted to personally overseeing this domestic spying program for years.

These actions are explicitly against the law. But the administration says that other laws somehow allow for this unprecedented use of a foreign intelligence agency to spy on Americans right here in the United States. According to reports, political appointees in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel wrote still-classified legal opinions laying out the supposed justification for this program.

Governor Howard Dean is filing a formal demand that they release these documents. You can add your name to a Freedom of Information Act request by providing the information below.

*****end of clip*****

More keyboard activism!

capt

Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta

Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta (born 1954) was a Jordanian militant who was responsible for bombing a bus in 1986 on the Israel-controlled West Bank, killing one and severely injuring three.

A naturalized US citizen, he was subsequently deported from Venezuela to the United States, extradited to Israel, tried and sentenced to life in prison. The Israeli supreme court later invalidated his extradition and set him free.

Following the September 11, 2001 Attacks in the United States it was initially thought that Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta was one of the hijackers on board the first plane to hit the World Trade Center. This led to the harsh questioning of US immigration authorities and the intelligence community, because it was felt that they had failed to stop a known terrorist from entering the country under his true name. However his identity was confused with the Egyptian militant leader Mohammed Atta who was actually on board the flight.

Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta's current whereabouts are unknown.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Mahmoud_Atta"

*****end of clip*****

That was a different Atta, but what troll needs the truth or the facts. Blind faith perverts the truth all the time.

capt

"I was provided with additional input that was radically different from the truth. I assisted in furthering that version." ~ Oliver North

Never believe a proven liar or practiced prevaricator.

capt

it would seem that #66's account of things is just a little bit skewed, as evidenced by #69 -

mohammed atta the supposed pilot highjacker of flight11 who was also a visitor to abramoff's casino boat was NOT the jordanian mahmoud atta who blew up an israeli bus in '86

Bush's Impeachable Offenses

Capt, Where were you on or about...?

Shocking the Conscience of America

DU rears its' ugly head

A real smoking gun

If the 9-11 Commission is really looking for a smoking gun, it should look no further than at Lieutenant-General Mahmoud Ahmad, the director of the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) at the time.

In early October 2001, Indian intelligence learned that Mahmoud had ordered flamboyant Saeed Sheikh - the convicted mastermind of the kidnapping and killing of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl - to wire US$100,000 from Dubai to one of hijacker Mohamed Atta's two bank accounts in Florida.

A juicy direct connection was also established between Mahmoud and Republican Congressman Porter Gross and Democratic Senator Bob Graham. They were all in Washington together discussing Osama bin Laden over breakfast when the attacks of September 11, 2001, happened.

Mahmoud's involvement in September 11 might be dismissed as only Indian propaganda. But Indian intelligence swears by it, and the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has confirmed the whole story: Indian intelligence even supplied Saeed's cellular-phone numbers. Nobody has bothered to check what really happened. The 9-11 Commission should pose very specific questions about it to FBI director Robert Mueller when he testifies this month.

In December 2002, Graham said he was "surprised at the evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the [September 11] terrorists in the United States ... It will become public at some point when it's turned over to the archives, but that's 20 or 30 years from now." He could not but be referring to Pakistan and Mahmoud. If Mahmoud was really involved in September 11, this means the Pakistani ISI -"the state within the state" - knew all about it. And if the intelligence elite in Pakistan knew it, an intelligence elite in Saudi Arabia knew it, as well as an intelligence elite in the US.

*****end of clip*****

Re-visit an old article if you have the time.

capt

Americas most wanted IBW

Go to the link @ #73 for the complete story...pretty damned convenient timing, eh?

Explosives Heist One of the Biggest in Recent History
Officials Say The Material Taken From the New Mexico Area Can Level a Building

Dec. 20, 2005 ??According to federal officials, the theft of 400 pounds of high-powered plastic explosives in New Mexico is one of the largest high explosives heists in recent history.
The material was taken from Cherry Engineering, a company owned by Chris Cherry, a scientist at Sandia National Labs. The site, located outside Albuquerque, had no guards and no surveillance cameras. It was the site's second theft in the past two years.

Go to the link @ #73 for the complete story...pretty damned convenient timing, eh?

Explosives Heist One of the Biggest in Recent History
Officials Say The Material Taken From the New Mexico Area Can Level a Building

Dec. 20, 2005 ??According to federal officials, the theft of 400 pounds of high-powered plastic explosives in New Mexico is one of the largest high explosives heists in recent history.
The material was taken from Cherry Engineering, a company owned by Chris Cherry, a scientist at Sandia National Labs. The site, located outside Albuquerque, had no guards and no surveillance cameras. It was the site's second theft in the past two years.

letter from Kerry...

Dear Alan,

If you ever needed a reminder of how broken Washington has become under one-party rule, we're getting it loud and clear in the closing hours of this session of Congress. Instead of sending a unified and unanimous signal to our troops on the front lines, Republicans are instead scheming to make a giveaway to the big oil companies their parting shot before Congress leaves Washington this winter. The Republicans' aim is sadly simple: mission accomplished for the big oil companies, mission unaccomplished for our troops, our environment, and America's real energy security.

In the very early hours this morning, Republican Senators, in a desperate legislative maneuver, have attached an arctic drilling proposal to the defense bill. They're putting oil companies ahead of our troops. Senator McCain got it right when he called this maneuver "disgusting."

If you agree, call your Senator now and help us get this special interest giveaway off the bill that is supposed to be helping our troops.

Call your Senators and tell them to stand up against this Republican abuse of power

The Military Officer's Association of America predicted this tactic last week: "We're concerned that insertion of any divisive, non-defense related issues at the last minute could further delay enactment of this crucial legislation. Both defense bills are urgently needed to support our military efforts. Congress is already three months late passing them, and needs to get off the dime."

Yesterday, a group of five high-profile generals sent a letter to Senator Frist that said: "It is not helpful to attach such a controversial non-defense legislative issue to a defense appropriations bill. It only invites delay for our troops as Congress debates an important but controversial non-defense issue on a vital bill providing critical funding for our nation's security."

Republican leaders know that drilling in the Arctic Refuge has nothing to do with this critical defense legislation. They know that just weeks ago, the arctic drilling proposal didn't have the votes to pass in the light of day because it's wrong for America. Now, the Republicans know where our generals stand on this matter. Will you join us in making them listen to our military?

Call your Senators and tell them to stand up against this Republican abuse of power

We have to make it clear that it's dead wrong for the Republican leadership in this Congress to break Senate rules in a last-ditch attempt to sneak through the arctic drilling proposal. Congress shouldn't keep our troops waiting in order to keep special interests happy.

Ask yourself: how long will our troops have to wait while Republican Senators attach unrelated, controversial ideological adventures that don't pass the test with the American people?

Call your Senators and tell them to stand up against this Republican abuse of power

I'm doing all I can to force the Republican leadership to surrender their irresponsible arctic drilling proposal. If they don't, I intend to spend a lot of time on the Senate floor talking about this. And if people want to call it a filibuster, that's fine by me.

I need your help today to lobby your Senators to take this controversial provision off the defense bill.

This is no small fight. What the Republicans are doing dishonors our troops, it dishonors the Senate, it breaks the public trust - and in this particular instance, it would lead to the destruction of one of America's most treasured wildlife refuges. I won't stand for it.

And next time these Republicans tell me that we have to destroy this wildlife refuge for our energy security, I'm going to tell them the truth that you and I know with every fiber of our being: we cannot drill our way to energy independence; we have to invent our way there. The best ways to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil are to conserve more, waste less, and develop more fuel-efficient cars so we use less oil and gas.

I'm not going to stand for the hollow, empty, more of the same energy policy written by Dick Cheney in secret meetings that puts at risk the troops this defense bill is meant to protect.

Call your Senators and tell them to stand up against this Republican abuse of power

Tell your Senators to oppose this underhanded attempt to hijack legislation for our troops to give an early Christmas present to the oil companies.

Thank you for fighting back. Your voice will make a huge difference.

Sincerely,

John Kerry

Capt. #50. The leadership of our country is all the proof we need that neither intelligent design or evolution are of any consequence and further proof that aliens have taken over the planet.

A CounterPunch Special Report

Did the Bush Administration Lie to Congress and the 9/11 Commission?
9/11: Missing Black Boxes in World Trade Center Attacks Found by Firefighters, Analyzed by NTSB, Concealed by FBI

By DAVE LINDORFF

One of the more puzzling mysteries of 9-11 is what ever happened to the flight recorders of the two planes that hit the World Trade Center towers. Now it appears that they may not be missing at all.

Counterpunch has learned that the FBI has them.

Flight recorders (commonly known as black boxes, though these days they are generally bright orange) are required on all passenger planes. There are always two-a flight data recorder that keeps track of a plane's speed, altitude, course and maneuvers, and a cockpit voice recorder which keeps a continuous record of the last 30 minutes of conversation inside a plane's cockpit. These devices are constructed to be extremely durable, and are installed in a plane's tail section, where they are least likely suffer damaged on impact. They are designed to withstand up to 30 minutes of 1800-degree heat (more than they would have faced in the twin towers crashes), and to survive a crash at full speed into the ground.

All four of the devices were recovered from the two planes that hit the Pentagon and that crashed in rural Pennsylvania. In the case of American Airlines Flight 77, which hit the Pentagon, the FBI reports that the flight data recorder survived and had recoverable information, but the voice recorder was allegedly too damaged to provide any record. In the case of United Airlines Flight 93, which hit the ground at 500 mph in Pennsylvania, the situation was reversed: the voice recorder survived but the flight data box was allegedly damaged beyond recovery.

But the FBI states, and also reported to the 9-11 Commission, that none of the recording devices from the two planes that hit the World Trade Center were ever recovered.
---------
By Golly! Why do you suppose they would EVER lie about such a thing? We all know bushco NEVER EVER EVER EVER lies! But I did always find it odd that a passport could survive that steel beam melting heat, while the black boxes disintegrated into oblivion.

Saladin, this is as suspicious as the fingerprints surviving the pentagon crash which evaporated the plane. Strange how evidence that supports the official government conspiracy theory survives, but in Plane Sight everything else disappears.

#75 DEN, when will we end this madness of everlasting wars? DU has a life span of a billion years. Will all of mankind die from DU?
We should fear the Bush terrorists more than the Al Qaeda terrorists.

Pope Benedict XVI says that secularity has a place and there must be a separation between religion and secularity. I sense that informed religious leaders are starting to believe that Bush's policies are very damaging to America and our religious institutions.

#66 Foul Ball --

Your post is laughable and filled with distortions, otherwise known as lies:

Senator Al Gore was not a member of the United States Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and did not take part in the questioning of any witnesses before the Committee. HE DID NOT QUESTION OLIVER NORTH.

Furthermore, Ollie North never mentioned Osama Bin Laden in his testimony -- he did mention another terrorist, Abu Nidal.

Additionally, your allegations against Warren Christopher and Bill Clinton are false -- your facts are wrong. What makes this particular story even more ridiculous is that, years before, Ronad Reagan and George Schultz were falsely accused by nutballs like you of the same thing.

Hardball, you are a Foul Ball!

Chimpy sez: Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution. > I guess he said it before it became "a goddamn piece of paper. The rest if anybody cares is HERE

*good one DEN

Montana governor Dem. Brian Schweitzer on Iraq

I had the chance to interview Montana governor Brian Schweitzer -- a prairie populist Democrat who charged to victory in a blood red state -- and he laid out his own plan for Iraq. Keep in mind this is a man who also speaks Arabic and spent years building irrigation projects in Saudi Arabia and Libya:
---
---
Schweitzer also claims the administration has refused to let him visit the region:

I've lived there. I've been asking for the opportunity to visit my troops. I am the commander-in-chief of my national guard. We have a large number of them over there and they never allowed me to go. Now they have congressmen and senators coming and going. And other governors coming and going. The Hooters Girls and Jimmy Kimmel and championship wrestlers and everyone you can imagine. But they told me that we're concerned about your security, governor.

Well, it could be that I lived in the Middle East for six and a half years. Maybe they know that I understand Arabic. Maybe they have a fair understanding that I might know as much about that area as any other public policy makers.

Larry Johnson quote from my post last night...

It appears the most likely explanation is that the Bush Administration did not want to have to tell a Federal judge that they were using information obtained from interrogations that violated the spirit and the letter of the Geneva Conventions.
===========================

So basically, we have kidnapped suspects (illegally), held them in secret prisons away from our courts (illegally), tortured them (illegally), and used the 'info' from said torture to spy on Americans (illegally).
Not a "slam dunk", it's more like a "hit for the cycle"(in baseball, getting a single,double, triple, and a home run in one game), in sports analogies.

Bush's AIDS money is a heck of a lot more than the EU, or the UN w/o US money. Bono deserves BIG credit for thanking Bush for good Bush does, even when he disagrees on other things. The pro-democracy Left should be thanking Bush