Mr. David Corn,

GREAT POST!

Spot on.

Thanks for all of your work!

Kirk

Short week! It's a race to the finish.

PS. I hope you hate a good backyard BBQ and flag-burning picnic. Cheers!

*had*

David's been drinking the NYT kool-aid,again. I guess anything goes when you just want to be considered one of the good ol boys with Keller.

How about those conservatives winning in Mexico? Now that's a topic! I see the progressives are hard at work trying to steal that election also. They will fail just as they did in 2000and 2004.

I didn't know the NYT served kool=aid.

What a great 4th!

I think the best part was witnessing a couple of flag burners getting their asses kicked by some bikers. Now that's what free speech is all about!

Cindy Sheehan to fast for a whole 8 hrs!

She's not going to let Saddam out fast her by god. She's going to skip two meals!

factchecker, how about these whining whiney second graders? he he he !!!!!!

BBL when the trolls finish their shifts.

Mouth-breather LBH ejaculates:

Now that's what free speech is all about!

Yeah! The right to assault people with different views is what it's all about! Yeee-hah!

The two faces of Rumsfeld

2000: director of a company which wins $200m contract to sell nuclear reactors to North Korea

2002: declares North Korea a terrorist state, part of the axis of evil and a target for regime change

Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, sat on the board of a company which three years ago sold two light water nuclear reactors to North Korea - a country he now regards as part of the "axis of evil" and which has been targeted for regime change by Washington because of its efforts to build nuclear weapons.

Mr Rumsfeld was a non-executive director of ABB, a European engineering giant based in Zurich, when it won a $200m (£125m) contract to provide the design and key components for the reactors. The current defence secretary sat on the board from 1990 to 2001, earning $190,000 a year. He left to join the Bush administration.

More HERE

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

Seems like business as usual, or am I missing something? Two faced liar is a prerequisite to work for this WH.

capt

Not all House Democrats are up on their leadership & playbook
By Josephine Hearn - The Hill

Three weeks have passed since congressional Democrats announced their New Direction for America,the domestic agenda they propose should they win control of the House or Senate, but some Democrats apparently still haven't gotten the memo.

Asked Thursday to comment on their agenda, a half-dozen House Democrats remained fuzzy on the particulars.

The new model, etc., etc? faltered Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas).

I haven't even looked at it,admitted Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.). I'm not very good at talking points.

I like mine better,Rep. Gene Taylor (D-Miss.) declared while looking over a list of the Democrats six priorities as if it were the first time he'd seen it.

House and Senate Democratic leaders unveiled the agenda mid-June with some fanfare. They held a press conference, wrote letters to their colleagues, talked it up in caucus meetings, distributed laminated talking-point cards and plugged it in an exclusive interview with USA Today.

This is a watershed moment,the leaders wrote to their colleagues June 13. Democrats are listening to what matters to the country, and have united behind a positive agenda that will get America back on track.

On Thursday they drove the point home again with an encore press conference held before easel displays proclaiming New Direction for America 21 times. The six-pronged agenda proposes providing affordable healthcare, lowering gas prices, raising the minimum wage, lowering the cost of college, preventing Social Security privatization and restoring fiscal responsibility.

Still, even by later in the day Thursday, the message had yet to saturate some areas of the Democratic caucus, an unsettling situation for a party that often laments the fact that it must compete for press attention with the president’≥ bully pulpit.

Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) said he was not sure what agenda had been unveiled weeks earlier and reprised an hour before.

What was presented today? he asked, brow furrowed, while noting that a fish crisis in his district had kept him from staying current.

It wasn't until presented with a laminated talking-points card that he perked up. Oh! Good stuff! he exclaimed.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) started off slow, which slogan are you referring to? but rallied gamely, expounding on the virtues of the new Direction.

I think it is a potent phrase. Do you want more of the same, or do you want a new direction? I think it's a very powerful message, he intoned.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), senior Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, handled an inquiry with aplomb, pronouncing the agenda excellent.

It gives the Democrats a platform so they can talk about energy, economic security, healthcare. We need a new direction in America!_____________________________________________
Ya, new direction. Which direction are we talking about, again?

Microsoft Patents Ones, Zeroes

REDMOND, WA In what CEO Bill Gates called "an unfortunate but necessary step to protect our intellectual property from theft and exploitation by competitors," the Microsoft Corporation patented the numbers one and zero Monday.

At a press conference beamed live to Microsoft shareholders around the globe, Bill Gates announces the company's patenting of the binary system.

With the patent, Microsoft's rivals are prohibited from manufacturing or selling products containing zeroes and ones the mathematical building blocks of all computer languages and programs unless a royalty fee of 10 cents per digit used is paid to the software giant.

"Microsoft has been using the binary system of ones and zeroes ever since its inception in 1975," Gates told reporters. "For years, in the interest of the overall health of the computer industry, we permitted the free and unfettered use of our proprietary numeric systems. However, changing marketplace conditions and the increasingly predatory practices of certain competitors now leave us with no choice but to seek compensation for the use of our numerals."

A number of major Silicon Valley players, including Apple Computer, Netscape and Sun Microsystems, said they will challenge the Microsoft patent as monopolistic and anti-competitive, claiming that the 10-cent-per-digit licensing fee would bankrupt them instantly.

"While, technically, Java is a complex system of algorithms used to create a platform-independent programming environment, it is, at its core, just a string of trillions of ones and zeroes," said Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy, whose company created the Java programming environment used in many Internet applications. "The licensing fees we'd have to pay Microsoft every day would be approximately 327,000 times the total net worth of this company."

More HERE

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

It is not such a new idea, did Seinfeld have George try to patent the name "Seven" or some such thing?

capt

Mouth-breather LBH ejaculates:

By Don

Don, last week you were infatuated with my ass and now ejacutation? I see why you progressives are so popular!

NOT!! ha ha

Human events online 7/5/2006

David left some stuff out-

The New York Times doesn’t expose national secrets for profit as some have claimed. It does so for ideology.

To their mind, it is better that 10 guilty terrorists (or even 100) go free than that George W. Bush remain President, possess a successful legacy or pass his political capital onto the next Republican nominee for the presidency.

In pursuit of the War on Bush, the old media have:

Revealed covert wiretapping programs aimed at foreign terrorists trying to contact collaborators within the United States.

Revealed CIA transportation infrastructure, right down to the tail numbers on individual airplanes.

Revealed covert banking investigations designed to find the donors and money launderers that make terrorist mass murder feasible.

Focused on the rare abuses, rapes, murders, civilian casualties, and friendly fire incidents that offer to discredit the entire military while it is under Bush’s command. While at the same time, ignoring any individual act of heroism, medal ceremony, or inspirational tales of valor, charity, humanity or honor among our troops in combat.

Revealed covert detention facilities and the foreign allies that have helped us to capture and detain those in them, threatening these alliances and exposing these allies to terrorist retribution.

Taken up the cause of the brutal prisoners at Guantanamo as if they were child-like victims of Bush, human rights martyrs unrelated to the war they began.

Tracked each new death among our military personnel in Iraq as if it were the countdown to the end of Bush’s life, the political equivalent to the flashing crystals from Logan’s Run. Normally, highlighting our casualties would be a job for enemy propaganda. But since the casualty clock helps in the war the media really believes in -- the War on Bush -- they dutifully report every tick, tick, tick, even exaggerating the numbers by including those who spontaneously die of natural causes and traffic accidents as far away as Kuwait. Likewise, they have claimed that the lower-than-civilian suicide rate among our troops is an epidemic caused by the “cracking” of morale.

In short, the elite media have functioned as the intelligence services and the propaganda publishers of our enemies, solely because they share with them a hatred of George W. Bush. If the enemy of one’s enemy really is one’s friend, then the terrorists have certainly found friends in America’s newsrooms.

Did you see Bill Bennett on the Meet The Press panel with Dana Priest, William Safire and John Harwood? They talked about Bush and Cheney's NY Times bashing. It's worth a look. Andrea Mitchell reads a Bennett quote about Dana Priest's secret CIA prison article in which Bennett says she should be put in jail. Wait to you hear how Priest responds.

The Schumer/McConnell debate isn't bad either.

(link)

Another one bites the dust! he he he

*** Exclusive To The Radio Equalizer ***

Has Janeane Garofalo's liberal talk show been declared FUBAR by Air America Radio? With one source indicating (via hard copy information) that it may leave the airwaves as soon as tonight, it appears very likely that the self- loathing and acerbic talker / actress / Hollywood political hothead may already have done her last show.

If the hate- filled Garofalo remains in any capacity at the network, it will be as an occasional political correspondent, perhaps for phone-ins during election season, for example. But she may very well be ready to walk away for good.

In addition, the "Majority Report" show appears to have been cancelled, with co-host Sam Seder possibly heading into a temporary late- evening hosting role in many Air America markets outside of New York City.

Yes. The NYT loves terrorists. Post 16 proves it!!!!!

Payback is a bitch!

Squeeze Gray Lady Till She Squeals (... Close your eyes and picture that !!!)
Human Events ^ | Jun 30, 2006

It is time for the U.S. Justice Department to squeeze the Old Gray Lady until she squeals.

New York Times Editor Bill Keller and some of his reporters need to be hauled before a grand jury and forced to reveal who told them about a secret U.S. government program designed to detect financial transactions among al Qaeda terrorists.

If they refuse to cooperate, they should go to jail.

If liberal friends of the Times complain, they should encounter a simple refrain: Remember Valerie Plame.

When columnist Robert Novak revealed that Plame, wife of former Ambassador Joe Wilson, had worked for the CIA and had a role in sending her husband on a secret CIA-sponsored trip to Niger that resulted in Wilson’s eventually writing a misleading anti-war op-ed for the New York Times, liberals screamed that a great crime had been committed.

Contempt of Court

In fact, it turned out, no law prevented government officials from revealing Mrs. Wilson’s place of employment to reporters.

Nonetheless, Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft announced a criminal investigation. He recused himself and named bulldog prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald as special counsel.

Fitzgerald subpoenaed New York Times reporter Judith Miller to appear before a grand jury to discuss whether any administration official had mentioned Plame to her. When Miller refused to comply, a federal judge sentenced her to up to 18 months in jail for contempt of court.

The Supreme Court refused to hear her appeal and she went to prison.

After three months, Miller decided to testify after all. She named I. Lewis (Scooter) Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Cheney, as the person who told her about Plame (even though she had never written about Mrs. Wilson and in her notes incorrectly identified her as “Flame”).

"the hate- filled Garofalo"

Aint' it the truth!!!! Liberals in the media hate this country just like the kool-aid drinking NYT David Corn and friggun low life librul corn posters. Why do liberals hate war-loving terrorist-hating americans? I hate not knowing. I love america. You don't. You america hater!!!!! god i'm patriotic.

Throw Keller in jail for publishing the truth about a legal treasury department money transfer tracking program.... and the WSJ, LA Times, etc etc etc Well, charge them with a crime first, then bash them in the face... or visa versa. Either way, they hate america and we love america.

Liberty!!!!! .... for everyone except those who exercise their rights.

20
Payback is a bitch standard operating procedure.

Right Jos Wilson? Right Dick Cheney.

there aren't any real effin flag burners and this:
How about those conservatives winning in Mexico? Now that's a topic! is a lame distraction of a topic.
--------------

poor persecuted liberal media NYTimes! oh why do they hate bush? and since they obviously hate bush so much why don't they accurately report what's actually going on? lame.
--------------
PHOTOS of REAL Iraqi innocent victims of neocon aggression

Whoa!

KEY LAY FOUND DEAD

Apparently, it was a heart attack. This isn't what I'd exactly call karma. He gets to get out of prison one way or another.

BEFORE I READ ANY POSTS THIS MORNING I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH. THE WHOLE FAMILY SAW IT YESTERDAY AND IT WAS QUITE AN APPROPRIATE MOVIE TO SEE ON OUR NATION'S BIRTHDAY.

BY FAR, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT MOVIE I'VE EVER SEEN.

IT IS A MUST SEE.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON GLOBAL WARMING UNTIL YOU'VE ALL SEEN THE MOVIE. I'M SERIOUS. IT'S A MIND BLOWER, AND IT'S NOT SET UP TO BE JUST ANY MIND BLOWER.

IT'S NOT ABOUT AL GORE OR BUSH. IT'S ABOUT OUR PLANET.

Pastor Steve Wende of First United Methodist Church of Houston, said in a statement that church member Lay died unexpectedly of a "massive coronary."

Wende said Lay and his wife, Linda, were in Aspen, Colo., for the week "and his death was totally unexpected. Apparently, his heart simply gave out."

= = = =
totally?

26 Flaming ...green house gases.

IF YOU CANNOT SEE THE MOVIE, GET THE BOOK.

IT IS PUT IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS AND IT DASHES THE CYCLICAL THEORY ALL TO PIECES. IT HAS GONE WAY BEYOND CYCLICAL IN JUST THE LAST 10 YEARS. 2005 HAS SKYROCKETED THESE FACTS. IT'S AN EXTREMELY WELL-DOCUMENTED PIECE.

THE FACTS WILL SCARE YOU OUT OF YOUR SEAT. AND THEY'RE PUT IN A VERY UNDERSTANDABLE MANNER. IT HAD MY ELEVEN YEAR OLD JUMPING UP AND DOWN IN HIS SEAT.

YES, I'M GOING TO BE ADAMANT ABOUT THIS.

Somebody must've told Kenny-Boy there wasn't gonna be a pardon! He had his heart set on it.

CIA Reportedly Disbands Bin Laden Unit
AP | AP | July 4, 2006

NEW YORK -- A CIA unit that had hunted for Osama bin Laden and his top deputies for a decade has been disbanded, according to a published report.

Citing unnamed intelligence officials, The New York Times reported Tuesday that the unit, known as "Alec Station," was shut down late last year. The decision to close the unit, which predated the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, was first reported Monday by National Public Radio.

The officials told the Times that the change reflects a view that al-Qaida's hierarchy has changed, and terrorist attacks inspired by the group are now being carried out independently of bin Laden and his second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

The CIA said hunting bin Laden remains a priority, but resources needed to be directed toward other people and groups likely to initiate new attacks.

"The efforts to find Osama bin Laden are as strong as ever," said CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Millerwise Dyck. "This is an agile agency, and the decision was made to ensure greater reach and focus."

A former CIA official who once led the unit, Michael Scheuer, told the Times that its shutdown was a mistake.

"This will clearly denigrate our operations against al-Qaida," he said. "These days at the agency, bin Laden and al-Qaida appear to be treated merely as first among equals."

====
From "Wanted: Dead or Alive" to "Not wanted" Hmmmmm...

FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP FLIP FLOP

One more thing about An Inconvenient Truth. It puts everything else in perspective.

First and foremost, it's about our planet. It's not about balancing economics vs environment. What good is it to have money if you don't have a planet to spend it on. Or you have to spend all of it on dwindling food supplies, air-conditioning and heat, (you won't be able to drive your money) and everyone else has evacuated or died.

Let me reiterate. It's not about Bush. It is not, in the end, a political movie. It's a college course in reality.

Yes, it turned my head abrubtly. It will turn yours too.

Global warming can be dealt with. It takes a few simple steps and telling everyone you know to also follow those few simple steps. This is a people problem first.

Where there's a will, there's a way.

See the movie. Read the book.

CRIMINAL CHARGES FILED AGAINST bush sr. IN ICELAND

also do a google search for: ARREST BUSH 41

THE MYSTERIOUS DEATH OF AN ENRON EXEC

Ken Lay is NOT the first Enron executive to kick off suddenly.

Less we forget...

The "venerated" New York Times were fromer WMD cheerleaders and had to print a front page retraction RE: jumping on the Iraqi war bandwagon.

You folk should read THIS http://www.motherjones.com/arts/books/2006/07/at_a_loss_for_words.html IF you ever hope to be anything else than ALSO RANS in the future!!!

http://www.motherjones.com/arts/books/2006/07/at_a_loss_for_words.html

The Right is setting the terms of this debate. If the debate were framed honestly, this would become a replay of the Terry Schiavo issue (among others): 1) Conservative politicians sense a hot-button issue and rush to take center stage with their rhetoric; 2) Polls come in showing that Americans largely disagree; 3) Conservative politicians rush to distance themselves from the comments they made only days before.

In the Schiavo case, so many Americans had painful personal experience with right-to-die issues that Democrats didn't have to deliver a counter-message. The NYT story does not have that personal appeal for people, so Dems must develop talking points and keep repeating them. This has been a challenge in part because the Right's argument is wrong for so many reasons that Dems don't know where to begin.

Forget that the NYT article did not reveal any secrets that Bushco had not already revealed. That argument is too complex for a Jay Leno punchline, so it holds no chance of scoring points with that 70% of Americans who aren't really paying attention. The Right has at least two handy one-liners for deflating this argument. Don't waste your breath.

Instead, Dems must focus on two talking points:

1) Re-introduce the fact that the Wall Street Journal also reported the story on the same day. We knew this on June 23 but by June 24 this point was forgotten. (Yes, I know the LA Times also had the story--too much information for little brains. Focus. Focus.) Every time a Repug says "New York Times," he/she/it must be interrupted mid-sentence with "...and the Wall Street Journal." Over and over and over, until people realize that this is not about one paper with a vendetta. Repeat after me: "Wall Street Journal. Wall Street Journal."

2) In every debate on this, Dems need to keep asking Repugs this simple question posed by radio talk-show host Bernie Ward to a right-wing debate opponent: "Should the government be able to dictate what newspapers can and can't publish?" This is a rope-a-dope question for Repugs because the obvious, true-blue all-American answer is "no". But they can't say no while implying that they mean yes. And they can't say yes without being exposed as Communists (actually fascists but it would be more fun and effective to call them Communists.) All a wing-nut can do in response to this question is dodge it, and if Dems keep asking it over and over, it becomes increasingly obvious that Repugs are dodging it.

That's it. Win the debate in two easy steps.

Very good essay eggman. Exactly.

#11 Capt

Didn't know about that disgusting flip-flop. Of course, we all know about the photo of Rumsfeld shaking hands with Sadam. George Bush Sr. completely backed and armed Hussein during the Iran/Iraq war. Then he did a turn around in 1990-91. For oil's sake naturally. He didn't give a wit about Kuwait.

#33 spy

I'm just about to read this. It sounds interesting, but not surprising right?

And now, for everyone's reading pleasure: Andy Borowitz.

Bush Opposes Marriage Between Man and Flag

I guess Carey missed John Stossel's article today or the MIT prof's article last week in the Wall Street Journal refuting and repudiating Vice President Gore's assertions about global warming. Although neither are dispositive, they at least give lie to the notion that the idea of man-made global warming is not contested in the scientific and academic communities.

Then again, why should factual assertions get in the way of a good story? Kyoto is crashing all over the world.

"On July 25, 1997, before the Kyoto Protocol was finalized (although it had been fully negotiated, and a penultimate draft was finished), the U.S. Senate unanimously passed by a 95-0 vote the Byrd-Hagel Resolution, which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables for developing as well as industrialized nations or 'would result in serious harm to the economy of the United States'.

The Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol to the Senate for ratification."
-Wikipedia

Now, why do you think President Clinton never submitted the protocol to the Senate for a vote?

#17
I watched the clip the other day. It was lovely.

Below is an exerpt from the WALL STREET JOURNAL story that ran on June 23.
-----

Treasury Tracks Financial Data In Secret Program --- Since 9/11, U.S. Has Used Subpoenas to Access Records From Fund-Transfer System

By Glenn R. Simpson

23 June 2006

The Wall Street Journal - A1

Since shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the U.S. Treasury Department has been secretly tracking suspected terrorist financing through a far-reaching program that gives it access to records from the network that handles nearly all international financial transfers.

The information comes from a Belgian firm known by its acronym, Swift, which manages much of the world's financial-message traffic. Under the program, U.S. counter-terrorism analysts query Swift's vast database of billions of financial transactions for information on activity by suspected terrorists. The program operates under a series of broad U.S. subpoenas.

U.S. officials say the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program has been highly successful both in leading to the apprehension of terrorism suspects and in thwarting terrorist operations. People familiar with the program said, for example, that it yielded useful information on the bombings last July 7 in London. The program "has helped to disrupt terrorist cells and operations and has helped save lives," Treasury said in a statement to The Wall Street Journal.

Still, disclosure of its existence may be controversial in Europe and other parts of the world and within the global banking industry, which has long worried about the privacy of transactions. U.S. officials said few American citizens would have financial data that fall under the program, because they are unlikely to engage in international money transfers.

Stuart Levey, Treasury's top counter-terrorism official, said the program was initiated after department lawyers determined they had the legal authority to subpoena Swift, which keeps its data in the U.S. To his knowledge, Mr. Levey said, such broad subpoenas of Swift data had not been attempted previously.

He said the subpoenas are based on a longstanding U.S. law dealing with economic sanctions, known as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Passed in 1977, it allows the president to impose economic sanctions when dealing with a national-security threat. The law has been used, among other things, to impose sanctions on rogue states.

The program is known to officials of the world's leading central banks, as well as key U.S. allies in the war on terror, with which the U.S. has shared data. Its existence also is known to Swift's board, which consists of representatives of the organization's member banks.

While U.S. officials had never discussed the tracking program publicly until yesterday, they have repeatedly discussed in broad terms their efforts to engage in surveillance of cross-border financial activity around the world and have widely publicized the fruits of such surveillance in efforts to blacklist corrupt financial institutions.

In a statement, Swift said, "In the aftermath of the September 11th attacks, Swift responded to compulsory subpoenas for limited sets of data. Our fundamental principle has been to preserve the confidentiality of our users' data while complying with the lawful obligations in countries where we operate . . . .Through this process, Swift received significant protections and assurances as to the purpose, confidentiality, oversight and control of the limited sets of data produced under the subpoenas."

The government has a similar program through which it accesses data from Western Union, The Wall Street Journal reported last year.

David,

You say The New York Times isn't anti-Bush?

Here is a direct quote Punch Sulzberger, the publisher of the Times, gave at a commencement address on May 21st of this year.

"When I graduated from college in 1974, my fellow students and I had just ended the war in Vietnam and ousted President Nixon. Okay, that's not quite true. Yes, the war did end and yes, Nixon did resign in disgrace, but maybe there were larger forces at play.

"Either way, we entered the real world committed to making it a better, safer, cleaner, more equal place. We were determined not to repeat the mistakes of our predecessors. We had seen the horrors and futility of war and smelled the stench of corruption in government.

"Our children, we vowed, would never know that.

"So, well, sorry. It wasn't supposed to be this way.

"You weren't supposed to be graduating into an America fighting a misbegotten war in a foreign land.

"You weren't supposed to be graduating into a world where we are still fighting for fundamental human rights, be it the rights of immigrants to start a new life; the rights of gays to marry; or the rights of women to choose.

"You weren't supposed to be graduating into a world where oil still drives policy and environmentalists have to relentlessly fight for every gain.

"You weren't. But you are. And for that I'm sorry."

Now, tell me again, with a straight face if you can, that the NYT is not anti-Bush.

Carey,
I plan to see the movie.

Eggman,
Yes, very good.

factchecker,
John Stossel? Come on.

Factchecker

As I said, no discussion until you've ACTUALLY seen the movie. Get it?

Oh! Did that sound too dictatorial for the high and mighty majesty?

There is no repudiation of actual facts, my darling. It doesn't wash no more.

Photos are not the only tools used. Facts, facts, facts.

One more thing, factchecker. This documentary is not about politics or who did what. It's about the PLANET. See it before you speak. You'll understand.

Jeanne, you've got to see it. It's an absolute must. It is strikingly devastating.

spy, boy those Icelandics sure have Bush sr. nailed. Exactly! If only....

Factchecker

The United States is the single largest contributor to green house gases. You can combine most all other countries together and the United States tops it.

That's why.

David Corn,
I respect the post today. I agree with everything except one tiny little thing.

You wrote:
it would have appeared before the 2004 presidential election. The ensuing hullabaloo could have influenced the election results.

I have come to the conclusion (it was just reinforced) that Bush didn't win the election so...I'm thinking that any news could have come out and he would have 'won'. That usurper in chief. Thief.

"Should the government be able to dictate what newspapers can and can't publish?"

gee, can't think right know. Question begets questions:

"Should the government be able to dictate what you can and can't eat?"

I don't know but tell me why we have the USDA for food?

"Should the government be able to dictate how fuel efficient is your vehicle or how you travel?"

I don't know but again, why we have the DOT & the FAA and FMA?

"Should the government be able to dictate how old one can be to marry, to smoke, to vote?"

Help us understand, eggman? What's happened to our `freedom'?

Jeanne,

Here is a quote from the Stossel report. Now, if any of the assertions he makes are wrong, please let me know.

"The Washington Post reported that because of melting ice caps and glaciers, 'The End Is Near!' But melting Arctic ice won't raise sea levels any more than the melting ice in your drink makes your glass overflow.

"MSNBC and the BBC ran stories on the coming calamity from Greenland's melting glaciers. Unlike Arctic ice, those melting glaciers could raise sea levels. But other reports note that Greenland's ice has been thickening in the interior of Greenland.

"The former vice president's film shows dramatic film of big chunks of ice breaking off glaciers, but the 'calving' of icebergs is a normal, natural process involved in the growth of glaciers into the sea. The movie features some majestic glaciers that existed in the 19th Century that have all but disappeared today -- but it doesn't bother to mention any of the glaciers growing in Norway, New Zealand and even the United States. The U.S. Forest Service reports that the Hubbard Glacier in Alaska's Tongass National Forest is advancing so rapidly, it threatens to close off a major fjord.

"He shows shocking time-lapse photos of ice disappearing from Mt. Kilimanjaro. The ice there has been melting for over a hundred years."

There's still a lot left to learn about these matters. Let's not go destroying the American economy in the meantime.

Carey,

This is what happens when scientists try to look at both sides of the global warming issue. Now, Richard Lindzen is an Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at MIT. And, what are your and Professor Gore's qualifications?

"So how is it that we don't have more scientists speaking up about this junk science? It's my belief that many scientists have been cowed not merely by money but by fear. An example: Earlier this year, Texas Rep. Joe Barton issued letters to paleoclimatologist Michael Mann and some of his co-authors seeking the details behind a taxpayer-funded analysis that claimed the 1990s were likely the warmest decade and 1998 the warmest year in the last millennium. Mr. Barton's concern was based on the fact that the IPCC had singled out Mr. Mann's work as a means to encourage policy makers to take action. And they did so before his work could be replicated and tested--a task made difficult because Mr. Mann, a key IPCC author, had refused to release the details for analysis. The scientific community's defense of Mr. Mann was, nonetheless, immediate and harsh. The president of the National Academy of Sciences--as well as the American Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Union--formally protested, saying that Rep. Barton's singling out of a scientist's work smacked of intimidation.

"All of which starkly contrasts to the silence of the scientific community when anti-alarmists were in the crosshairs of then-Sen. Al Gore. In 1992, he ran two congressional hearings during which he tried to bully dissenting scientists, including myself, into changing our views and supporting his climate alarmism. Nor did the scientific community complain when Mr. Gore, as vice president, tried to enlist Ted Koppel in a witch hunt to discredit anti-alarmist scientists--a request that Mr. Koppel deemed publicly inappropriate. And they were mum when subsequent articles and books by Ross Gelbspan libelously labeled scientists who differed with Mr. Gore as stooges of the fossil-fuel industry.

"Sadly, this is only the tip of a non-melting iceberg. In Europe, Henk Tennekes was dismissed as research director of the Royal Dutch Meteorological Society after questioning the scientific underpinnings of global warming. Aksel Winn-Nielsen, former director of the U.N.'s World Meteorological Organization, was tarred by Bert Bolin, first head of the IPCC, as a tool of the coal industry for questioning climate alarmism. Respected Italian professors Alfonso Sutera and Antonio Speranza disappeared from the debate in 1991, apparently losing climate-research funding for raising questions."

Sounds like some closed-minded people to me. Doesn't it to you?

Factchecker

Once again. Instead of talking, see the movie. OK?

Liked your post Just Curious.

Here's a nice filler to David Corn's post. It goes further than just defending the NY Times to the overall implications of these ridiculous accusations. Of course, it's Robert Scheer.

A Disgraceful Attack Against the NY Times

I've gotta go. We need the phone for business.

Carey,
I have read excerpts from the book. I consider Vice President Gore a fraud and a charlatan. He is the penultimate snake-oil salesman of the last quarter-century.

I'm making comments about global warming in general. Now, why don't you take some of the information you gleaned from your movie and respond to my points. With all your newfound knowledge, you should be able to blow me away.

You have me at a distinct disadvantage, because you are the recipient of all of the pearls of wisdom divined from Dr. Gore and, alas, I am not.

Or do you lack the courage of your convictions to engage in philosophical debate? Of course, given the drivel you've produced thus far, I'd be scared, too.

factchecker, AFAIK Gore does not have a PhD, so is not "Dr." The evidence for climate change, global warming, is rather overwhelming. Try

RealClimate
http://www.realclimate.org

Sorry that I cannot remember the *&^(^ syntax required to provide you with the link...

DB,

No need to bother linking for those links are unused by the mindless.

capt

How do I make a hyperlink?

A link is done with something called the Anchor tag.

The anchor tag looks like this:

 <A HREF="pagename.html">Link Here</A>

Anything that appears between the begin and end anchor tags will take you to the specified destination when clicked.

 <B>BOLD TEXT</B>

 <I>ITALIC TEXT</I>

If you use "preview" you can see your formats and test your links by a "right click" then "open in new window". If it works the new window will open with your linked page. A real life example:

 <A HREF="http://www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames">Capital Games</A>

Will look and work like this:

Capital Games

*****

And there you go!

capt

Real Climate

For all that are interested.

capt

One needs to look no farther than our own EPA to see the ongoing manipulation of "science" to fit policy...

FC, STFU

If I anything I assert heretofor is wrong, please tell me why.

EPA policy imperils kids, suit says
Acceptable pesticide level called too high for farm children
Bob Egelko | Chronicle | June 8, 2005

The government's failure to take the vulnerabilities of farmworkers' children into account when setting tolerance levels for pesticide residue on food has endangered hundreds of thousands of children, environmental and labor groups charged in a federal lawsuit Tuesday. (link)

capt, thanks. A few more times and maybe the HREF will sink in...

For those interested in a less technical introduction to modern understandings of climate, try

A Few Things Ill Considered

You will find that the State is the kind of organization which, though it does big things badly, does small things badly, too.
John Kenneth Galbraith (1908 - 2006)

The mystery of government is not how Washington works but how to make it stop.
P. J. O'Rourke (1947 - )

Sure there are dishonest men in local government. But there are dishonest men in national government too.
Richard M. Nixon (1913 - 1994)

Hey! I've been invited to join the local chapter of Drinking Liberally

Finally, a social club that seems formed just for me!

John Stossel: Paragon of Journamalism

John Stossel: The Mustachioed Super-Journamalist

">The Destabilization Game

More HERE

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

Toms Dispatch - the clip is just the last two paragraphs.

capt

Just Curious at #47 proves my point exactly. It won't answer a simple yes or no question. It has to raise other, irrelevant questions.

Should the government dictate what newspapers can and can't publish? My answer is simple: no. What's your answer?

John Stossel: Defender of Truth, Justice and the American Way

The Destabilization Game

One CR too many -

capt

Here is a signature comment on the New York Times. Editorial pages have given Hitler Bush positive commentary!!!!! Individual columnists, like Maureen Dowd, Frank Rich, Bob Herbert, and Paul Krugman, have been objective, fair, and balanced in reporting on Hitler Bush!!!!!

I guess factboy didn't hear dear leader admitting the globe is warming. He said it, but with the idiotic 'out' that we can't prove it's man-made. So it's ok with him to just keep on polluting... don't worry about mitigating circumstances by cutting back.

What's the chances that bushco will be represented at Lay's funeral?... and who do you think will get that assignment? Surely his good buddy Chainee will wanna be there.

Jesusless: The Church of Conservatism

65 eggman--apparantly the founding fathers didn't believe in newspaper censorship, that's why they included it as one of the top items in the bill of rights.

tell me, why does factless hate America so much as to insult the framers of the Constitution for understanding that tyranny in government carried out through control of information is the most dangerous thing to a democratic republic?

Why do they hate America and its freedoms so much?

Oil hitting all time high over $75 per.

Forgot to say that #71 is a great, great article!!!!!

check your facts here at factcheck.org

Factless accusations from koolaid drinkers are in abundance today it seems.

Must be out and about! Read the blogs, post your comments, and remember to be civil because big brother is watching you!!!

tell me, why does factless hate America so much as to insult the framers of the Constitution for understanding that tyranny in government carried out through control of information is the most dangerous thing to a democratic republic?

I agree 100%. If these haters had not caught me, I would still be making up shit at the NYT's. Freedom to print completely made up shit iss where it's at!

Alan, Alan, Alan

If only you would stop wasting all this energy on the internet, that I invented. Everyone needs to step up to the plate and quit driving cars, flying planes, heating homes. Air concditioning needs to halt, the internet needs to go away (my one regret) and newspapers like the NYT's need to quit chopping down trees. Be part of the solution, not the problem - Alan!

May I be the first to announce the Sitting Duck Award. It goes to....Ann Coulter!!!

Coulter wins Sitting Duck award; Last awarded to columnist who made up 43 people

Conservative firebrand Ann Coulter was awarded the 'Sitting Duck Award' by the National Society of Newspaper columnists, who met in Boston this past weekend, Editor and Publisher reports.

The award, typically doled out in an ironic fashion, came with a statement from the society that Coulter received the prize "for cheapening political discourse in America."

"We award the Lame Duck reluctantly, because we know Ms. Coulter is desperate for any kind of attention," the society added.

CLICK HERE TO SEE WHERE AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH IS PLAYING IN YOUR AREA

Carey -- Bill and I just returned from seeing An Inconvenient Truth.

Right now I have to tend to other matters...more later.

Well here's a story that kind of chews a hole in the NY Times is treasonous bait.

Former CIA and State Dep't terror official says bank spying already known to terrorists

Larry C. Johnson - Guest columnist

If you still labor under the fantasy that the New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, and the Wall Street Journal divulged "classified information" that put U.S. lives at risk or hampered our ability to track terrorist financial assets, you are willfully ignorant or have been living in a sensory isolation tank.

Starting in the immediate aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, the Administration took up the hue and cry of the need to track terrorist finances. Congressman Michael Oxley, Chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, speaking at the outset of a public congressional hearing on 3 October 2001:

I applaud the president and our distinguished witness today, Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill, for taking swift action to block terrorist assets that may be located here in the United States and to warn foreign banks that the U.S. is poised to block their assets in this country and deny them access to U.S. markets that refuse to freeze terrorist assets overseas. The secretary is also to be commended for setting up a new foreign terrorist asset tracking center which I hope will become a model for interagency cooperation in law enforcement and in the sharing of financial intelligence.
------------
It goes on. It is a rather lengthy article with many links siting instances where the information was made public for all to see.

WMR wrote about SWIFT and banking issues as far back as 1988.

Not new "news" to anybody.

It is a fake issue to distract. Kabuki Theater.

I do not trust Bush or the NYT's.

capt

I'd like to post Larry Johnson's conclusion.

The furor over the "SWIFT" story has little to do with keeping America safe and a lot to do with keeping Republicans in power. If the leak was so devastating there would be a full court investigation of who in the Federal Government spoke to the reporters. But, as shown above, this information was not secret and was already in the public domain. It appears that Bush, with the advice of Karl Rove, sees demonizing the New York Times as a great way to energize a flagging political base. When it comes to hurting our nation's security and putting our citizens at risk, the fault lies with Bush, not the New York Times.

----------------
Karl Rove is back behind the curtain. The usurper thinks the levers Karl is pulling are working. Silly usurper. Silly.

Typical liberal - attack the messenger instead of the message. So, which of John Stossel's assertions in #39, above, are wrong? Or do you just like to cast stones?

The point is that, for as many articles as you can give me by reknown scientists substantiating global warming, I can give you an equal number, also by reknown scientists, debunking the theory.

For instance, why was it as warm in the tenth century as it is now? Why did we have the Little Ice Age between the fourteenth and nineteenth centuries? None of that was caused by man.

And, yet, you want to risk totally debilitating the American economy to fix a problem that (a)might not be a problem at all and/or (b)might not be caused by, or fixable by, man.

False claim that no one ever heard of SWIFT prior to the Times story

July 4, 2006 -- On the recent edition of the McLaughlin Group, New York Daily News and US News publisher Mort Zuckerman, in defending the White House response over the revelations in the New York Times about U.S. intelligence monitoring of the global banking electronic funds transfer network SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication), made the wild and false claim that no one ever heard of SWIFT prior to the Times story. For the record, this editor published a technical paper in 1988 at the Carnahan Conference on Security Technology/Electronic Crime Countermeasures at the University of Kentucky dealing with global networks like SWIFT and suggested that U.S. intelligence agencies were "loathe to discuss" issues related to penetration of "trans-border data flows" by hackers and other outsiders. There was one simple reason for this avoidance of the issue -- agencies like NSA and the CIA were monitoring networks such as SWIFT in the 1980s and they did not want to bring attention to the fact that the networks were susceptible to such eavesdropping.

Neo-con propagandists allege SWIFT is secret. Neo-cons, once again, demonstrate their ability to lie with straight faces.

For the benefit of the Bush White House, which believes that history began with them in January 2001, WMR is providing a copy of the 1988 paper. It should also be stressed that this editor worked for NSA until 1986.

Trans Border Data Flow Security Paper

Page 1

Page 2

Page 3

Page 4

More HERE

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

So why all the noise about the Times story?

capt

John Stossel deserves to be attacked for his nonsense.

The SWIFT story is a non-issue for the Bushies - they are using this to attack a newspaper that they have harbored an irrational anger towards for decades.

Mushroooooooommmmmsssssss.

To eggman @ 37:

You said:
"In every debate on this, Dems need to keep asking Repugs this simple question posed by radio talk-show host Bernie Ward to a right-wing debate opponent: 'Should the government be able to dictate what newspapers can and can't publish?'

The answer is - categorically no to the first half of your question and categorically yes to the second half. For instance, if I am the federal government and have found that a newspaper in the 1950's has the information the Rosenberg's supplied to the Soviets, you bet I should stop that publication.

If I am the government and found that the NYT is about to publish sensitive troop movements, information that, if in the wrong hands would cause severe injury to our troops, I would certianly stop that publication.

Now, how about I ask you a question. Suppose I am the Washington Post and I am led to the plans to the stealth bomber, or smart bombs. Do you think I should have carte blance to publish those plans and specs because of the people's "right to know"?

Some of you folks are really foolish children. This is exactly the reason the American populace can't trust you with national security.

Maybe they are trying to make an example of the NY Times. 'If we can take down the mighty NY Times we can take down anyone.' Stupid thinking. NY city hates Bush...I mean the usurper.

Joe @ 86,

So, which of John Stossel's assertions about global warming that I have posted above are incorrect, and what is the source of your claim?

Or, like most liberals, can all you do is attack the messenger instead of the message?

Panel orders Abu Ghraib documents from Pentagon

A U.S. congressional panel has ordered Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to turn over documents on the probe into abuse at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison after the Pentagon failed to respond to an earlier request.

The House Government Reform Committee issued a subpoena to Rumsfeld last week and said the Pentagon must produce a raft of documents, including all drafts of the report on the Abu Ghraib investigation, by the end of business on July 14.

The subpoena follows Rumsfeld's failure to respond to a March 7 letter from the congressional panel requesting the same documents.

A Pentagon spokesman said on Wednesday he knew nothing of the subpoena.

...."When the Committee requests information from executive branch departments and agencies, we try to be reasonable and accommodate their legitimate concerns about the volume and the sensitivity of what we're asking for," said Rep. Tom Davis, a Virginia Republican and chairman of the committee.

"But if the department won't even return a call, after three months, and begin that dialogue, we really have no choice but to subpoena the material and compel their attention to our request."

The subpoena comes as a subcommittee of the Government Reform Committee investigates allegations by Army Spc. Samuel Provance that his attempts to give investigators information about abuse at Abu Ghraib were "rebuffed" and he was retaliated against for providing unclassified information to the media.

Provance testified before the subcommittee in February.

The panel called for all drafts of the investigation report on the prisoner abuse and all communications related to information provided by Provance about Abu Ghraib.

It also requested all communications related to cases in which detainees' family members were involved in interrogations after Provance said children of detainees were used to "break" the prisoners and force them to cooperate with investigators.

WSJ Hit Piece on Gore Movie Relies on Grievously Flawed Study

In today's (June 26, 2006) Wall Street Journal, prominent climate skeptic Richard Lindzen tries to make the case that "There Is No consensus On Global Warming." Most of the article is, typically, invective against Al Gore and his movie, An Inconvenient Truth.

Lindzen does acknowledge that thousands of scientists from 120 countries have agreed, through the extraordinarily rigorous International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) process, that human activity is driving global warming. He also acknowledges that this consensus was recently confirmed by a report prepared for Congress by the National Academy of Scientists.

Here is Lindzen's only substantive response:

More recently, a study in the journal Science by the social scientist Nancy [sic Naomi] Oreskes claimed that a search of the ISI Web of Knowledge Database for the years 1993 to 2003 under the key words "global climate change" produced 928 articles, all of whose abstracts supported what she referred to as the consensus view. A British social scientist, Benny Peiser, checked her procedure and found that only 913 of the 928 articles had abstracts at all, and that only 13 of the remaining 913 explicitly endorsed the so-called consensus view. Several actually opposed it.

Peiser's work and Lindzen's reliance on it is an embarrassment. Here's why:

1. Peizer misunderstands the point of Oreskes study. The point was not that every article about climate change explicitly endorsed the IPCC conclusions. The point is that if there was real uncertainty there would be "substantive disagreement in the scientific community" that would be reflected in peer reviewed literature. There wasn't.

2. Peiser didn't find any peer reviewed studies that oppose the scientific consensus. Peiser claimed that 34 papers "reject or doubt" the consensus view. Tim Lambert got Peiser to send him the abstracts of those 34 papers. The vast majority of these papers express no doubt whatsoever about the consensus view. Only one paper, by the Association of Petroleum Geologists, cited by Peiser actually rejects the consensus view and it "does not appear to have been peer reviewed outside that Association."

Peiser has admitted that his work included errors. But ultimately, it doesn't make a difference. The point of activity like this isn't to be right, it's simply to provide fodder to people like Lindzen to create the appearance of uncertainty.

More HERE

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

"Get the facts, or the facts will get you. And when you get them, get them right, or they will get you wrong."

~ Dr. Thomas Fuller (1654 - 1734), Gnomologia, 1732

capt

Re #84: factchecker, again you are simply wrong. The concensus report, IPCC, is supported by almmost all climatologists and by more than 1000 scientific papers.

The claim that it was warmer in the tenth century than now is simply wrong. Look, for example, in

All Things Ill Considered

with regard to the fact that it is now warmer than any time in the last 100,000 years.

but this time you'll have to go back to find the link, its too long to repost (Even though I remember how...) and I have little patience with the willfully ignorant.

UN to review alleged US human rights abuses after 465 page report by US nonprofits

In an exclusive announcement to RAW STORY, a coalition of 142 U.S.-based non-profits and organizations and 32 individuals say they have filed what they believe is the most comprehensive review of human rights violations in the United States ever produced.

The 465-page "shadow report" was assembled for the United Nation's Human Rights Committee as part of its review of U.S. human rights abuses later this month, a routine review that occurs every four years for countries that have ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

...The "shadow report" is a rebuttal to the official U.S. report. Its claims include:

Immigration: The physical abuse and poor detention conditions many non-citizens face when they attempt to enter the U.S., the failure of U.S. immigration law to adequately protect refugees, asylum seekers and immigrant families and respect their right to due process, and discrimination against migrant workers;

Hurricane Katrina: The racially discriminatory evacuation of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina and discriminatory policies in the hurricane's aftermath that have restricted residents' right to vote, ability to participate in the rebuilding process and access to basic necessities;

Domestic Use of Torture: The failure of the government to prosecute Jon Burge, a Chicago police officer implicated in a torture scandal that advocates have labeled the "Abu Ghraib in the United States," despite several federal investigations that conclusively found that the city's police department routinely tortured suspects;

Juvenile Justice: The sentencing of youth and teens to life in prison without the possibility of parole; and

Prison conditions within the United States, such as shackling women prisoners during childbirth, limitations on prisoners' access to courts, lack of access to adequate health care, rape and discrimination against minorities that violate international human rights standards.

Comparing the already known information about SWIFT to exposing Nuclear secrets or troop movements is the dumbest argument in the world, unless, or course you can provide examples of that being done. As Kristor, Priest or any top reporter in Washington(besides Miller) will tell you, they have withheld tons of information that could have sold papers because somoene inside Gov't intel told them not to release it, that it was only background info, or off the record.

Tell me, factboy--do you think ALL LEAKS should result in imprisonment or just those you can rally the angry idiots around?

I don't recall you coming to Val Plame's defense, and since her job(and everyone in her outfit who were also exposed) was to monitor Iran's nukes, which has to be of equal importance to monitoring financial transactions.

Do you know the ratio of agents in the Treasury devoted to tracking money going to Cuba versus money going to Al Qaida.

We have about 25 times as many agents working on Cuban money trails than we do on Al Qaida money trails. In fact, when Bush took office one of his first directives was to tell those in the intel community to "BACK OFF" of tracing Saudi money funding terrorism.

Yes, ignorance and naivety are bliss.

65
Just Curious at #47---has to raise other, irrelevant questions.
Posted by: eggman

Mr./Ms. eggman, my questions are "irrelevant"? Not hardly! I was being diplomatic w/your post but perhaps my diplomacy was wasted!

Like most issues, there are few simple Yes/No answers; lest you ask "Did Italy win its semi-final soccer game?".

The Gov't is NOT supposed to dicatate what we eat, drive, print, etc.....But it absolutely sets guidelines/parameters and legal boundaries. IF you can't figure out what I just said, let's drop the conversation!

Clueless George is Watching You Pin

"The Bush administration's press-bashing campaign may be good election-year politics, but it is adding a poisonous new element to the national security debate at the very time the administration ought to be trying to rebuild a bipartisan consensus. . . .

David Ignatius | Washington Post opinion

#96
The government doesn't dictate what I eat but I'd sure like to know they are checking the safety of the food I eat in a store or restaurant. I'd like to know my government is demanding that the corporations not polute the rivers and streams. I'd like to know that the drugs my family take are not going to kill anyone. There are organizations who serve as watch dogs in this country but they need the might of the federal government to stand up to the likes of the drug, tobacco, and oil companies.

If i might add to my post on #99...the meat industry also. Very, very powerful group that is doing serious damage to the earth.

96 just curious--just what parameters/guidelines were violated by the WSJ, LA and NY Times?

And, just so you know, the Government is just an extension of the people, who have decided that the food we eat should be safe, the air we breath clean, that tests and a minimum age should be established who can and who can not operate a motor vehicle.

We the people have determined these things necessary to protect ourselves from the non-caring members of our society as we recognize our imperfections along with our virtues.

So we use the Government, which is ours, to enact some policies to keep us safe.

National Review: ThinkProgress Doesn't Have The Slightest Idea What They Are Talking About

Jason Lee Steorts of the National Review has published a column taking issue with our response to his cover story on global warming, "Scare of the Century." The response is useful because it more explicitly exposes the tactics of Steorts and others trying to muddy the debate:

1. Discount the consensus of thousands of scientific experts in favor of a handful of skeptics backed by the fossil fuel industry. Steorts objects to two of our points because they are "based on the International Panel on Climate Change's models" which he claims "make unrealistic assumptions." The IPCC process involves thousands of scientists from over 120 countries who, over a period of years, develop detailed reports on climate change. The peer-review process is far more extensive than even the most prestigious scientific journals the most recent report was reviewed by more than 1,000 top experts. The process includes "climate skeptics" and representatives from industry. In response, Steorts cites one individual, Patrick Michaels who disputes the IPCC's science. Michaels, whose work is backed by the fossil fuel industry, once famously "proved" global warming wasn't happening at all by mixing up degrees with radians.

2. Distort scientific research, much of which confirms the severity of global warming, to confuse the issue. First, Steorts quotes Patrick Michaels asserting that "Antarctica has been gaining ice." Michaels doesn't have any research to back up that claim, so Steorts is forced to rely on the scientific research of others, including Curt Davis. Steorts is unconcerned that Davis has said that the use of his research by climate skeptics is a "deliberate effort to confuse and mislead the public." Pieter Tans, who runs a lab at National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, explains that this is a typical tactic "They argue not as scientists but as lawyers. When they argue, they pick one piece of the fabric of evidence and blow it up all out of proportion their purpose is to confuse."

In the last line of his column, Steorts claims we don't have the "slightest idea what [we] are talking about."

But the issue here is not that we know what we are talking about and Steorts doesn't. The point is that thousands of scientific experts do know what they are talking about. The few people paid by the fossil fuel industry to cast doubt on the consensus, and writers like Steorts who act as their megaphone, are not a credible or reliable rebuttal.

More HERE

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

"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan (1911 - 2004)

capt

"It is dangerous to be right in matters on which the established authorities are wrong.": -- Voltaire - [François Marie Arouet] (1694-1778)

=
"The whole drift of our law is toward the absolute prohibition of all ideas that diverge in the slightest form from the accepted platitudes, and behind that drift of law there is a far more potent force of growing custom, and under that custom there is a natural philosophy which erects conformity into the noblest of virtues and the free functioning of personality into a capital crime against society." -- H. L. Mencken - (1880-1956) American Journalist, Editor, Essayist, Linguist, Lexicographer, and Critic Source: quoted in New York Times Magazine, 9 August 1964

=
Make yourself sheep and the wolves will eat you." -- Benjamin Franklin

=
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can do, I should do. And what I should do, by thegrace of God, I will do." -- Edward Everett Hale

===
Thanks ICH Newsletter!

Thanks twice more now, capt!

84

"The world is flat."

John Stossel
(fact checked by factchecker)

Don't shoot the messenger. If it's not true, just tell me where I'm wrong.

or, like most libruls, do you just shoot the messneger first and ask him questions later?

98

" 'Trust us' is not a winning argument in America -- either with newspaper editors or the public at large. Trust in government is earned by a pattern of trustworthy action, not by secrecy, evasion and partisan division. And the best way to rebuild lost trust is informed public debate."

"More than any other White House in history, Bush's has tried to starve, mock, weaken, bypass, devalue, intimidate, and deceive the press. . . ."

David Remnick | New Yorker

"The one thing I admire about Grover is how hard he works to make himself relevant. But he?s not relevant. He never has been and never will be. He should go pick on some fourth-graders."

- McCain

North Korea's Missile: Fired by Kim Jong Il, Built by Team Bush

George Bush is upset, distraught, that North Korea has fired a missile that could reach Alaska carrying a nuclear warhead. Well, Mr. President, you have only yourself to blame.

In case you can't recall, your intelligence chiefs ordered US agents to curb their investigation of A.Q. Khan, head of Pakistan's bomb-building program. There was mounting evidence Khan was selling his nuclear and missile material technology to Libya and North Korea.

The reason for the spike order, the "back off" directive, was that the investigators had tracked the source of funds for Mr. Khans flea market in fissile material to Saudi Arabia. Apparently, Team Bush did not want to make the Saudi's uncomfortable by exposing their payments to Khan.

We reported this on BBC in November 2001, based on informants within the top levels of our intelligence agencies, men unhappy with politicians who would have them avert their gaze.

More HERE

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

Hey, it is just business after all, eh?

capt

101
So we use the Government, which is ours, to enact some policies to keep us safe.

Posted by: TurdBlossom at July 5, 2006 06:57 PM

See, not hard to agree that the NYT's disclosure of the monitoring of International Fund movements is not in keeping with "policies to keep us safe". Seems we balance security/safety vs. freedom on just about everything--food, drugs, products, speech...! Explains why the Government has gotten so damned BIIIIIIIIIIG! No such thing as total safety with total freedom! Pointless 4-way arguing!

And regarding the Saudis, capt, recall that is the land of the Wahabis...

109--that was not McCain who said that, it was his campaign mangaer or spokesperson, not the Senator himself, he is much too cautious to take such a shot across the bow at a major fundraiser for his party.

111 Silent M--what are you trying to say? You think terrorists were unaware that we were tracking their finances, did you not read the press release the White House put out on 9/24/01?

It is still up on their site, go read it for yourself.

Or, were you calling the White House careless with our safety?

#111
SM
You don't have a unified nation without governmental involvement. Roads have to be maintained because without roads you have no exchange of goods. The educational system must be maintained because without that system education for the less fortunate will cease to exist. You must have departments like FEMA. After Katrina it's obvious why we need that.

The neocons would love for us to believe that government is too big. But if you don't pay somebody to get off their butts in a blizzard to plow out Main Street it ain't going to happen. If we the people don't pay the cops to get into their cars when it's 30 below and sit for eleven days straight without a call because the city closes down when the weather is ugly...if we, the people don't pay the cop who will?

You ever lose your muffler on a pothole? Those potholes are filled because road construction companies or county worker fill them. Sam the neighbor doesn't go out there and fill it. The pothole fairy doesn't fill it. And the road construction company will not volunteer to do it for free. They are a business. They must pay their employees to go out in the 90 degree weather and work with hot tar. That's how it works. I don't know how you think things get done but the local state and federal governments have many many responsibilities. If you want to know what it's like to have it shut down look at New Jersey. You want to see ugly?

World teen power on display

Scholar-athletes from 155 nations gathered last week to explore global issues and bond over everything from sports to the arts.

SOUTH KINGSTON, R.I. It wasn't the Olympics, an international bake-off, an arts festival, or a battle of the bands. In fact, the fourth World Scholar Athlete Games was all of these and more.

Some 1,900 high schoolers from all 50 states and 155 countries gathered here last week for a nine-day event hosted by the University of Rhode Island (URI) and sponsored by the Institute for International Sport (IIS) and the United Nations. It featured lectures from key thinkers, symposia on global issues, and opportunities to bond over everything from softball to symphony, track to theater.

"The point is to let us know there's more out there," says Mike Niles, 15, of Lincoln, R.I. "It's better than any summer soccer camp. What soccer camp has President [Bill] Clinton come and talk?"

First launched in 1993, the scholar-athlete games grew out of founder Daniel Doyle's travels as a basketball player and coach. Touring Europe and Cuba in the 1960s and '70s, he saw how sports fostered respect and understanding, even among children of different backgrounds.

His idea: Pool talent from around the world in one gym, one studio, one forum - and let fun do the rest.

More HERE

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

There is always hope for the future. The future belongs to the kids and I think they are going to make our generation look bad.

capt

#52 David B. & #55 Capt.

The site Gore gives at the end of the movie is www.climatecrisis.org

And with reference to your comment in #53, Capt. I refer all contrary arguments, which I consider ignorant of the real facts, to the movie. It is so much more graphic and, as you know or will know, deals with the complexity of the issues much more succinctly and easily than I ever could.

Factchecker--see above paragraph.

Hey All -

Factless @ 84 "And, yet, you want to risk totally debilitating the American economy to fix a problem that (a)might not be a problem at all and/or (b)might not be caused by, or fixable by, man."

Your point is? Are you saying that because scientists disagree that nothing needs to be done? Do you honestly believe that Man's impact on this planet is zero? Even I give you more credit than that. Also, I would like to know just exactly how our ecomony would become "debilitated"? No, I do not want you to post another article, I want YOUR honest and expert opinion. Say what you want about "Professor Gore" (and btw, for someone who claims to only deal with facts, you allow your personal bias to shine through on every occasion), but the FACTS are that NO ONE knows EXACTLY what is causing global warming. To say one way or the other is disingenious at best. Meaning no disrespect Carey, but I don't need to watch that movie to know that no one knows for sure what is causing global warming. Factless is correct in pointing out that glaciers DO break apart and that is a natural RECURRING phenomenon, as well as the temp spike in the 10th century A.D.

"Typical liberal - attack the messenger instead of the message."