Better have that IR eye lens looked at buddy,

It's rendering anomalies again.

Heh heh. Maybe, but it sees your evasiveness without fail. Tell us about "sidestepping" again?

If you think my position is wrong, your best response would be to demonstrate why. For example, "Even though DU can be in one's body for months or even years often without noticeable effect, DU is MORE dangerous than any number of everyday household chemicals that can kill you in minutes, because...."

Or, another example, "Dubya will be impeached even though his opponents don't have enough evidence of impeachable offenses to garner enough votes to do so because...."

---

Cordially,
Rush

elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com
Remove the obvious...

DU can be in one's body for months or even years often without noticeable effect

Kinda like HIV... but THAT never killed anybody either... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

House panel votes to cite Rove for contempt

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080730/ap_on_go_co/lame_duck_oversight


By LAURIE KELLMAN, Associated Press Writer 45 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - A House panel Wednesday voted to cite former top White House aide Karl Rove for contempt of Congress for defying a subpoena to answer questions about the dismissals of several federal prosecutors as its Senate counterpart explored punishments for an array of alleged Bush administration misdeeds.


Voting 20-14 along party lines, the House Judiciary Committee said that Rove had broken the law by failing to appear at a July 10 hearing on allegations of White House influence over the Justice Department, including whether Rove encouraged prosecutions against Democrats such as former Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman.

The committee decision is only a recommendation, and it was unclear whether Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., would allow a final vote. Rove has denied any involvement with Justice decisions, and the White House has said Congress has no authority to compel testimony from current and former advisers.

With little more than three months before Election Day, it wasn't clear whether majority Democrats could take any substantial action in a political environment in which time for the current Congress is running short and lawmakers face a host of daunting legislative problems and a cluttered calendar.

The House committee vote occurred as members of the Senate Judiciary Committee delved into allegations of wrongdoing ranging from discriminating against liberals at Justice to ignoring subpoenas and lying to Congress.

For his part, Rove has denied any involvement with Justice decisions, and the White House has said Congress has no authority to compel testimony from current and former advisers. His attorney, Robert Luskin, had urged the panel in letter not to vote for a citation, calling it a "gratuitously punitive" action that would serve no purpose because the question of executive privilege is already pending in two other cases in federal court.

Republicans who unanimously opposed the measure accused Democrats of staging political theater.

"Instead of conducting witch hunts, we should consider bipartisan legislation to reduce the price of gas, reduce crime and secure the borders," said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the top panel Republican.

But Democrats cited recent internal audits finding that politics heavily shaped Justice Department hiring, and they said that Rove had left them with no choice but to support a contempt citation.

"His name has come up repeatedly in the hearings on this subject," said Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich. "Yet he refuses to testify based on legally invalid claims of immunity privilege."

The Senate proceedings were the latest congressional review of the White House, a constitutionally mandated power that majority Democrats are eager to use. Justice Department Inspector General Glenn A. Fine, who reported this week that former department officials broke the law by letting administration politics dictate the hiring of prosecutors, immigration judges and career government lawyers, Fine said his office and Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility are investigating.

He said specifically that they're trying to determine whether Bradley Schlozman, former head of the department's Civil Rights Division, used political or ideological criteria to make hiring decisions.

Under questioning by Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the panel's senior Republican, Fine said he uncovered no evidence that any Justice officials involved made false statements to Congress or violated criminal law. Politicization of the hiring process for career positions is a violation of civil law and department policy, he said.

The Senate probe sprang from Justice's firings of nine federal prosecutors that sparked congressional investigations last year and led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

House and Senate Democrats said the findings of Justice's IG's office affirmed their contention that career employees there were hired and fired based on whether they were deemed sufficiently conservative, a violation of law. Conyers said earlier that he was considering bringing criminal charges against some of the former officials named in Fine's report who may have lied to his committee. Lying to Congress is a crime, but there's little agreement among Democrats on whether a perjury referral against some of the officials is warranted.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who led the investigation into the prosecutor firings, is pressing Fine to say whether making such a disregard of civil service rules a crime would deter the kind of conduct his investigation uncovered.

Similar legislation will be considered in the House.

"I will be asking Chairman Conyers to consider legislation to ensure that the politicization of hiring of career employees at the Justice Department never happens again," Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Those of u wanting to impeach bush or others over the fireings seem to forget that Clinton and many other presidents have fired or removed at times ALL of them as opposed to a few like Bush had.

Reality is that if u insist on impeaching bush over that, then we need to revist impeachment of Clinton & add other crimes that were ignored or passed over.


Clinton is a much better crook than Bush & HISTORY will reflect that.


Also we should impeach Congress as they had the same info as Bush on wMD and related... and have since WWII by law.

Ie; by law, certain members of Congress are required to have oversight & details of even the most secret.

Fact is, Congress is as guilty as Bush on just about everything done wrong.

But then the two biggest crooks to me were:

FDR - the only president to seriously consider eliminating the Constitution & BillofRights. Fortunately he decided otherwise. But to even consider it makes him as much a crook as any other.

Clinton - his refusal to do what he should as president and instead sitting on the success's of previous presidents and his preference for b/j's over doing his job.

Nixon - the paranoia and his willingness to destroy his enemies (even when only in his mind).

MCCarthy - for his evil attempts to brand many 'commie' soley to gain more power.
Many innocents were hurt by this evil human being.

The few in Congres (mostly demo) who prefer to call those who disagreee with them 'nazi's. These are among the worst of the bunch and in many ways worst than the listed ones above. But I will specifically note the worst offender who is Ed Kennedy.


Others could be on the list... but the overwelming obviousness of the above.

Scroll down some and note the other charges being levied, including the false reports delivered to Congress on WMDs. The firings are the only thing the media are covering but would be a nice foothold to begin with.

;)


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

FDR - the only president to seriously consider eliminating the Constitution & BillofRights.

Sounds familiar...

Clinton - his refusal to do what he should as president and instead sitting on the success's of previous presidents

Sounds familiar...


Nixon - the paranoia and his willingness to destroy his enemies (even when only in his mind).

Sounds familiar...

MCCarthy - for his evil attempts to brand many 'commie' soley to gain more power. Many innocents were hurt by this evil human being.

Sounds familiar...

The few in Congres (mostly demo) who prefer to call those who disagreee with them 'nazi's.

I can't imagine why...

I will specifically note the worst offender who is Ed Kennedy.

I think you're giving Mr Kennedy way too much credit... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

Ed Kennedy?

Ed Kennedy?

I'm guessing it's a reference to Senator Edward Kennedy, normally referred to as Ted. Younger brother of JFK and RFK.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

my mistake, did not remember his name was edward, thought theodore.

White House denies forging letter to link Hussein and al-Qaida


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080805/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_iraq




By BRETT J. BLACKLEDGE, Associated Press Writer 24 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The White House and the CIA on Tuesday adamantly denied a report that the Bush administration concocted a fake letter purporting to show a link between Saddam Hussein's regime and al-Qaida as a justification for the Iraq war.

The allegation was raised by Washington-based journalist Ron Suskind in a new book, "The Way of the World," published Tuesday. The letter supposedly was written by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, director of Iraqi intelligence under Saddam Hussein.

"The White House had concocted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam, backdated to July 1, 2001," Suskind wrote. "It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq thus showing, finally, that there was an operational link between Saddam and al-Qaida, something the vice president's office had been pressing CIA to prove since 9/11 as a justification to invade Iraq. There is no link."

Suskind said the letter's existence had been reported before, and that it had been treated as if it were genuine.

Denying the report, White House deputy press secretary Tony Fratto said, "The notion that the White House directed anyone to forge a letter from Habbush to Saddam Hussein is absurd."

Fratto and former CIA Director George Tenet also rejected Suskind's allegation that the U.S. had credible intelligence, before the 2003 invasion of Iraq, that Saddam did not possess weapons of mass destruction. It was supposedly British intelligence, based on information from a senior Iraqi official.

Fratto said U.S. and other intelligence agencies believed Saddam harbored such weapons and that Saddam had tried to make his neighbors believe he had them. In the end, no such weapons were found, undercutting Bush's main reason to go to war.

"We know now that those estimates were wrong, but they were the estimates we all relied on," Fratto said. "Regardless, military force in Iraq was used because Saddam Hussein defiantly failed to comply with the 17 UN Security Council resolutions Iraq was subject to."

Tenet, in a statement distributed by the White House, also issued a denial about the supposedly fake letter. "There was no such order from the White House to me nor, to the best of my knowledge, was anyone from CIA ever involved in any such effort," he said.

"It is well established that, at my direction, CIA resisted efforts on the part of some in the administration to paint a picture of Iraqi-al-Qaida connections that went beyond the evidence," Tenet said. "The notion that I would suddenly reverse our stance and have created and planted false evidence that was contrary to our own beliefs is ridiculous."

Suskind told The Associated Press that the criticism from the White House and Tenet were expected. He said Tenet "is not credible on this issue" and the White House "is all but obligated to deny this."

"If they go in the other direction, I think they're probably going to have to start firing people," Suskind said.

In his book, Suskind writes that Tenet gave Rob Richer, the CIA's former head of the Near East division and deputy director of clandestine operations, the fake letter during a fall 2003 meeting. Suskind quotes Richer as saying, "George said something like, 'Well, Marine, I've got a job for you, though you may not like it.'"

Suskind wrote that "Richer remembers looking down at the creamy White House stationery on which the assignment was written." He quotes Richer as saying, "This was creating a deception."

Suskind also quotes John Maquire, who oversaw the CIA's Iraq Operations Group, about the alleged fake letter. "When it was discussed with me, I just thought it was incredible, a box-checking of all outstanding issues in one letter, from one guy," Suskind quotes Maquire as saying.

Richer and Maquire, who both left the CIA in recent years, could not be reached Tuesday for comment about the book.

Tenet also challenged Suskind's assertion that the U.S. ignored intelligence that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction.

"As Mr. Suskind tells it," Tenet said, "the White House directed (and CIA allegedly went along with) burying that information so that the war could go ahead as planned. This is a complete fabrication. In fact, the source in question failed to persuade his British interlocutors that he had anything new to offer by way of intelligence, concessions, or negotiations with regard to the Iraq crisis and the British on their own elected to break off contact with him."

Tenet said, "There were many Iraqi officials who said both publicly and privately that Iraq had no WMD but our foreign intelligence colleagues and we assessed that these individuals were parroting the Baath party line and trying to delay any coalition attack. The particular source that Suskind cites offered no evidence to back up his assertion and acted in an evasive and unconvincing manner."

Suskind wrote that Habbush first told British intelligence agent Michael Shipster in January 2003 that invading forces would not find the weapons in Iraq.

"After being told that Habbush had said there were no WMD, Bush was frustrated," Suskind wrote in the book, quoting Bush telling an aide, "Why don't they ask him to give us something we can use to help us make our case?"

Suskind quotes Richer as saying Habbush's information was disregarded by an administration determined to invade.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Trial could bring US closer to closing Guantanamo

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080805/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/guantanamo_bin_laden_s_driver


By MIKE MELIA, Associated Press Writer Tue Aug 5, 5:46 PM ET

GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba - The war crimes trial of a driver for Osama bin Laden could bring the United States closer to its goal of closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

The 10-day trial of Salim Hamdan, in a makeshift courtroom behind coils of razor wire, offers a road map for clarifying the legal status of nearly a third of the more than 250 men still held here.

The military jury considering the case, the first U.S. war crimes trial since World War II, adjourned Tuesday without reaching a verdict and was set to return Wednesday for a third day of deliberations.

Hamdan could face life in prison if convicted of any of the charges against him — two counts of conspiracy and eight counts of aiding terrorism.

About 80 of the roughly 265 men held at Guantanamo are slated to be prosecuted by military tribunals. Hamdan's case, stalled by years of legal challenges that reached the Supreme Court, signals those cases can move forward now.

The U.S. government has long said it wants to close Guantanamo but has struggled get other countries to take the remaining prisoners — those not slated for prosecution — off its hands.

For those who are prosecuted, convictions could make it easier to send detainees to mainland prisons to do their time. The chief prosecutor for the Guantanamo tribunals, Army Col. Lawrence Morris, has even predicted the trials would be like Space Shuttle launches — so routine the public mostly ignores them.

"We are confident that we can try cases to the highest standards of justice," Morris said while waiting for the jury, six U.S. military officers selected by the Pentagon, to reach a verdict.

The military has not said where Hamdan, a Yemeni in his late 30s with a fourth-grade education, would serve his sentence, and has suggested he could even be held at Guantanamo indefinitely.

Hamdan was never alleged to be more than a minor figure in al-Qaida, a chauffeur to bin Laden. He was captured at a roadblock in Afghanistan with two surface-to-air missiles in the car.

He is accused of conspiring with al-Qaida in its plots against the United States, but his lawyers say he was a low-level bin Laden employee who stayed with him for the $200-a-month salary.

A Pentagon spokesman, Navy Cmdr. Jeffrey Gordon, said the completion of the 10-day trial marks "a substantial sign of progress" in one aspect of the Bush administration's effort to eventually close Guantanamo.

The military has already released more than 500 Guantanamo detainees to their home countries, where most were eventually set free.

Some analysts, noting Hamdan's relatively minor status in al-Qaida, believe his trial is mostly an opening act, a demonstration of the U.S. legal system for prosecuting suspected terrorists.

The main event will be the prosecution, perhaps beginning by year's end, of five alleged plotters in the Sept. 11 attacks, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh.

"I assume the notion was, 'Let's see if we can get this engine to turn over,'" said Eugene Fidell, who teachers military law at Yale Law School. "I find it difficult to consider this as much of a landmark."

As a test run, the trial has drawn mixed reviews. Critics say it revealed the system's shortcomings by accepting secret testimony in a closed session, with journalists and other observers removed from the courtroom, and by using evidence from interrogations that defense lawyers say involved coercion.

The Hamdan trial also established some of the rights that Guantanamo prisoners will have before the tribunals. For example, the judge, Navy Capt. Keith Allred, rejected Hamdan's claims of certain consitutional rights, including the right to a speedy trial and to be advised of a right to remain silent — rulings that will be the subject of later appeals.

Even after jurors began deliberating, the prosecutors and defense were sparring Tuesday over the legal definition of a war crime.

The dispute centered on the charge Hamdan conspired with al-Qaida by transporting shoulder-launched missiles to kill U.S. service members. In his instructions, the judge said it was a war crime for "unlawful combatants" to kill civilians but did not mention soldiers — an instruction the prosecution said was incorrect. Prosecutors eventually dropped their complaint, avoiding a mistrial.

Jennifer Daskal, senior counterterrorism counsel for Human Rights Watch, said there was no excuse for failing "to close Guantanamo, try those accused of terrorist acts in a fair process, release or resettle the others, and finally put an end to this black spot on America's reputation.

Scott Silliman, executive director of Duke's Center on Law, Ethics and National Security, said he hopes Congress eventually moves detainees' cases to the U.S. federal court system or traditional military court-martials.

But he said the military commissions do serve a purpose by allowing for the prosecution of senior terror suspects against whom some evidence was obtained through harsh interrogations.

"I don't think you want to bring Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and Ramzi Binalshibh into the federal court system right now," Silliman said of the two al-Qaida figures, who were transferred to Guantanamo from secret CIA custody in 2006.

(This version CORRECTS Morris' title to prosecutor for tribunals.)


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Dear Friends,

Last week, Congressman Dennis Kucinich delivered a petition bearing more than 100,000 names to the Speaker of the House urging that impeachment proceedings begin into the conduct of President Bush. In a special video message, Dennis is asking for your help to deliver an even more powerful message to Congress when it reconvenes in September.

With new disclosures that the Administration tried to "cook the books at the CIA" by creating a phony, forged link between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein, "We cannot step back and let this President escape accountability."

If you have already signed the impeachment petition at www.kucinich.us, thank you. If you haven't, please do. And, in the next few weeks, please ask just one more person to sign so we can let the members of Congress hear our collective demand that they meet their obligation to uphold the Constitution.

Thank you.

The Re-Elect Congressman Kucinich Committee

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

White House cannot delay aides' testimony: judge

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080826/pl_nm/usa_congress_bush_dc

Tue Aug 26, 4:58 PM ET

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. judge ruled against the Bush administration in its fight with Congress over a probe into the firings of U.S. attorneys by refusing on Tuesday to delay an order that current and former White House aides comply with congressional subpoenas.

Federal judge John Bates ruled that he would not put off his July order that former White House counsel Harriet Miers testify to Congress, and that Chief of Staff Josh Bolten surrender documents related to the 2006 firings.

He said on Tuesday that the administration had failed to make its case that the order should be delayed while the administration appeals it.

Bates said the White House should now turn over requested documents and urged negotiations with Congress over Miers' testimony, in what has become one of the fiercest battles in the Bush administration's effort to strengthen presidential and executive-branch powers.

"Both sides indicated that discussions regarding an accommodation have resumed," Bates wrote in his ruling. "The court once again urges the political branches to resolve this dispute without further recourse to the judicial branch."

Congress has subpoenaed the two officials in its probe over whether the administration improperly fired nine U.S. attorneys for political reasons. But the White House has rejected the subpoenas, arguing that the officials immune from such orders from Congress.

Bates, who was appointed to the federal bench by President George W. Bush, ruled in July that the aides were not immune and Congress could force them to testify or provide documents. He did not specify a deadline, and noted on Tuesday that any congressional hearing on Miers was unlikely to occur until late September.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said, "we're reviewing the order and will respond at the appropriate time."

(Reporting by Randall Mikkelsen; editing by Mohammad Zargham)

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Do I believe everything is being watched like in the will smith movie ... no. But is it out there, will it be one day ... yes.

I worked for an ISP for years before and many years after 9/11. After 9/11 the number of "search orders" and "secret subpoenas" that we got from the FBI was crazy. Most was for child porn ... nasty but I don't see why that was included on the patriot act ... not al queada. The worse part was that most of the data they wanted was guess work and turned out wrong. The people were not online at the times they wanted or said they were. Anyway most of thise requests were not signed by a judge. In some cases by another FBI office. That was their method of checks and balances ... one office had to get another office to sign the subpoena before they could send it to us. And I loved the notes that were on top of the 9/11 ones. We could not talk about the subpoena for 3 to 4 years (i forget which one). Not even to a lawyer.

Add this to the fact that we see that the telcos gave the government access to sniff and listen to calls without even using the FISA court ... that is crazy stuff. Only Qwest said no. This being the TSP program.

Crazy stuff.

Chris.

You'd have to ask the FBI and NSA.

I wouldn't expect an answer though.

:D

.

As you're the one that said it I'm asking you. What's the evidence?

---

Do I believe everything is being watched like in the will smith movie ... no. But is it out there, will it be one day ... yes.

I worked for an ISP for years before and many years after 9/11. After 9/11 the number of "search orders" and "secret subpoenas" that we got from the FBI was crazy. Most was for child porn ... nasty but I don't see why that was included on the patriot act ... not al queada. The worse part was that most of the data they wanted was guess work and turned out wrong. The people were not online at the times they wanted or said they were. Anyway most of thise requests were not signed by a judge. In some cases by another FBI office. That was their method of checks and balances ... one office had to get another office to sign the subpoena before they could send it to us. And I loved the notes that were on top of the 9/11 ones. We could not talk about the subpoena for 3 to 4 years (i forget which one). Not even to a lawyer.

Add this to the fact that we see that the telcos gave the government access to sniff and listen to calls without even using the FISA court ... that is crazy stuff. Only Qwest said no. This being the TSP program.

Crazy stuff.

Chris.

You'd have to ask the FBI and NSA.

I wouldn't expect an answer though.

:D

.

As you're the one that said it I'm asking you. What's the evidence?

Thank you, Chris,

Kind of like a high tech 4th Reich.


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Kucinich speech "Wake up America!"

http://youtube.com/watch?v=bVp9cWOcZ7g


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

When it comes to the act of preventing crime we have to be very careful or we will create just what you said.

Do I believe everything is being watched like in the will smith movie ... no. But is it out there, will it be one day ... yes.

I worked for an ISP for years before and many years after 9/11. After 9/11 the number of "search orders" and "secret subpoenas" that we got from the FBI was crazy. Most was for child porn ... nasty but I don't see why that was included on the patriot act ... not al queada. The worse part was that most of the data they wanted was guess work and turned out wrong. The people were not online at the times they wanted or said they were. Anyway most of thise requests were not signed by a judge. In some cases by another FBI office. That was their method of checks and balances ... one office had to get another office to sign the subpoena before they could send it to us. And I loved the notes that were on top of the 9/11 ones. We could not talk about the subpoena for 3 to 4 years (i forget which one). Not even to a lawyer.

Add this to the fact that we see that the telcos gave the government access to sniff and listen to calls without even using the FISA court ... that is crazy stuff. Only Qwest said no. This being the TSP program.

Crazy stuff.

Chris.

You'd have to ask the FBI and NSA.

I wouldn't expect an answer though.

:D

.

As you're the one that said it I'm asking you. What's the evidence?

Thank you, Chris,

Kind of like a high tech 4th Reich.


.

---

Former CIA Official Exposes Bush Administration Fraud:

Flynt Leverett worked as a senior director for Middle East affairs at the National Security Council, the NSC, and he was a CIA analyst.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=7a3Bfox0k4g


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Cooperation?

I don't even know what they are or did?


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss