We know the Republican Party has lax standards for national security. The Plame and Dubai scandals prove that. We also know they have VERY high standards for snooping into people’s private lives, as we have seen from the illegal and extra-constitutional NSA wiretap program, which was originally set up to operate under the FISA court law, and was bastardized after 9/11 (we think) to snoop on Americans communicating with other Americans.

I say “we think” because those of us still able to distinguish reality from fantasy have carefully watched the Bu$hCo maladministration for the last five years and we are fully confident that Mr Bush has been paranoically snooping on dissident Americans for the last 5 years. The “dissidents” would be Democratic Party members, as well as some journalists, and most likely every Progressive and Liberal blogger they can identify.

Think Progress has an article about a program on Minnesota Public Radio that shows some bright sparks in the Inner Party have found a way to combine both of these UnAmerican concepts into one package:

A story by Minnesota Public Radio reveals a disturbing new way that a political party is secretly grabbing sensitive personal information about voters. This week the Minnesota Republican Party is distributing a new CD about a proposed state marriage amendment. Along with flashy graphics, the CD asks people their views on controversial issues such as abortion, gun control, illegal immigration, and so on. The problem – the CD sends your answers back to headquarters, filed by name, address, and political views. No mention of that in the terms of use. No privacy policy at all. The story concludes: “So if you run the CD in your personal computer, by the end of it, the Minnesota GOP will not only know what you think on particular issues, but also who you are.”

I’m surprised it took them this long to come up with the idea. The ultimate in Fascist Party sneakware. But then, I suppose, anyone who puts something from those criminals into their computers deserves it.

These practices fall way below the standard for today’s polling firms and web sites. The norm for polling firms is to anonymize the data and report only statistical totals. The norm for commercial web sites is to have a privacy policy, with Federal Trade Commission enforcement if the web site breaks its privacy promise. Without a privacy policy, the state party can tell your views to anyone at all. If you give the “wrong” answers on abortion or other issues, they can tell your boss, members of your church, or anyone else. In fact, these answers could get distributed to campaigns in your town during get-out-the-vote efforts – precisely the place where “wrong” answers can be most damaging. The right answer here is simple. If you are collecting data and keeping it in identified form, then you should tell people. If you are selling your lists or sending them to other groups, you should tell that as well. That goes for all political parties.

I respect Think Progress. A fine organization, with high motives. But I am a bit disappointed in their apparent surprise about this. The thought that a criminal organization would ever respect someone’s privacy, or actually commit honesty is astounding.

The second part of a Minnesota Public radio report by Bob Collins is here, and has links to the first day’s report:

I really enjoyed the production work on the CD for the marriage amendment. It was first-rate stuff and as a Flash novice, made me a little bit envious. The copy that Tom Scheck gave me required an access code. Do all the CDs being mailed out come with an access code? If so, I'm curious as to why that is and wondering if the "votes" I'm asked to take during the presentation are reported back to the MN GOP? And, if so, are they matched to the access code and do you keep a record of what code is mailed to what person?

Mark Drake, the Minnesota Party spokesman, replied:

Thank you for the kind words regarding the high tech merits of the cd. Like any political survey done by the Party, it is our hope the cd will help us recruit more volunteers, provide valuable voter ID information and hopefully allow us to raise money so we can continue to send the cd out to more Minnesotans.
On Friday, the cd will be released to the public. The cd's packaging will make clear that the cd is interactive in nature.

Interactive?

So if you run the CD in your personal computer, by the end of it, the Minnesota GOP will not only know what you think on particular issues, but also who you are. I'm not sure how polling firms do this. Do they keep track of the individual answers by identity? Maybe so. Maybe not.

There’s more, including screenshots of the opening, and interactive questions.

Hillary Clinton was asked how she felt about a new book that says Karl Rove is convinced she will be the 2008 candidate for President. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that President Bush's chief political strategist "spends a lot of time obsessing about me."

Now. That's. Just. Disgusting.

The man looks like a grubworm. I've never seen photos of his alleged wife and children, so I can only speculate. I never really believed that Jeff "Man-whore" "On your knees, boy. At Attention" Gannon was spending all that time in the White House teaching military drill to Mr Bush. That guy just likes to dress up and play soldier in front of real soldiers. Mr Gannon's skyrocketing advance into the White House press pool, and his perfect ability to lob in distracting softball questions always smelled of Rove/Orwell manipulation.

And isn't THAT a creepy thought? (How'd you like to be "manipulated" by Karl Rove, bunky?)

I don't doubt Mrs Clinton would love to be President. (Say, can you imagine the hysteria in the Facsist Party and MSM is she got the election?) John Yoo, with his "unitary executive authority" would be found floating face down in the Tidal Basin pool in West Potomac Park, with "six in the noggin" - an obvious suicide.

Karl Rove is hopefully obsessing about orange jumpsuits, and lawyers.

UPDATE: Since I'm suffering from terminal geriatricism (and have the grey hair to prove it) I posted this without a title of classification. My sincere aplogies to any who were confused.

John lays it out over at AMERICAblog:

Tell me again how much Republicans love our troops? Hey, if you guys like being sent to war with no plan and no exit strategy, then have your veteran services cut, you go right ahead and vote Republican and knock your socks off.

At least tens of thousands of veterans with non-critical medical issues could suffer delayed or even denied care in coming years to enable President Bush to meet his promise of cutting the deficit in half — if the White House is serious about its proposed budget.

After an increase for next year, the Bush budget would turn current trends on their head. Even though the cost of providing medical care to veterans has been growing by leaps and bounds, White House budget documents assume a cutback in 2008 and further cuts thereafter.

And one more thing. This is what happens when you have a president who launches wars of convenience on the wrong enemy without a plan for victory. You spend $300 billion the country doesn't have, then have to cut necessary services for patriotic Americans in order to pay for the failed war. Bush's mistakes come at a price.

Every time I think these creatures have hit the nadir of human expectations, they surprise me.

The latest CBS News poll figures are out and again, Dear Leader has broken new ground in victim popularity.

(CBS) The latest CBS News poll finds President Bush's approval rating has fallen to an all-time low of 34 percent, while pessimism about the Iraq war has risen to a new high.

Americans are also overwhelmingly opposed to the Bush-backed deal giving a Dubai-owned company operational control over six major U.S. ports. Seven in 10 Americans, including 58 percent of Republicans, say they're opposed to the agreement.

Thirty-four percent. Just think about that. CBS has always run fairly reliable polls, unlike Gallup, whose Bush polls never report lower than 39 %. (The reason that Gallup polls are consistently 4 to 5 % higher than any other organizations lies in the underlying data – Gallup uses samples consisting of 44% registered Republican, 31 to 34 percent “undeclared” and only 22 to 25 % registered Democrat.)

Only one in three Americans is willing to publicly admit to favoring the most dishonest, corrupt man ever put into the Oval Office.

CBS News senior White House correspondent Jim Axelrod reports that now it turns out the Coast Guard had concerns about the ports deal, a disclosure that is no doubt troubling to a president who assured Americans there was no security risk from the deal.

That’s right – did you know that? And – silly me – here I thought only the Vaterlandsicherheitamt (DHS for those of you still refuse to admit all the similarities between Bu$hCo and the NSDAP) was opposed to the deal, until Dear Leader explained to Gauleiter Chertoff just how unpleasant it is down at Gitmo. Now, The Coast Guard does more than just rescue drunk weekend sailors when they run out of gas 9 miles off shore. They also inspect foreign flag cargo ships, and their cargoes, on the open sea and sometimes even in US ports.

The troubling results for the Bush administration come amid reminders about the devastating impact of Hurricane Katrina and negative assessments of how the government and the president have handled it for six months.

In a separate poll, two out of three Americans said they do not think President Bush has responded adequately to the needs of Katrina victims. Only 32 percent approve of the way President Bush is responding to those needs, a drop of 12 points from last September’s poll, taken just two weeks after the storm made landfall.

Thirty-two percent. That’s because Americans have had time to process Katrina, after six months. They’ve seen the consequences of an inept, corrupt, rudderless malAdministration that is more interested in looting the Treasury than in saving American lives. They’re having trouble processing the results of the UAE deal.

“Noone ever thought someone would ship a nucular weapon into one of our ports”

We have now been assured by Mr Bu$h and his assorted sycophants, golf bag carriers, and fellators, that the folks running the UAE will be the most excellent stewards of our security at our 21 most important ocean ports. These are the ones who financed 9/11, supplied two of the suicide attackers, refused to allow us to examine the money trail to track down Osama bin Laden, and who are reportedly bestest buddies with him, hawking and falconing all over the landcsape in Pakistan and Afghanistan. But they'll do a good job protecting our ports.

Thanks to the pessimist, over on The Left Coast for pointing out Trish's really innovative idea:

Alert PR reader Vito D. had a really good question for the Deputy Defense Secretary. Gordon England said last week that those who question the port deal put our security at risk by giving people from Arab countries a complex. Vito asked:

Why not abolish the Secret Service and let U.A.E. guard the President? Now this would show our Arab allies that we trust them.

I agree. If there’s no problem with letting them hire the longshoremen in our ports, then while we’re at it, let’s put them where they could really do some good.

Robert Dreyfuss, writing at Tom Paine, has some ideas about the looming catastrophe that is Iraq:

With Iraq perched at the very precipice of an ethnic and sectarian holocaust, the utter failure of the Bush administration’s policy is revealed with starkest clarity. Iraq may or may not fall into the abyss in the next few days and weeks, but what is no longer in doubt is who is to blame: If Iraq is engulfed in civil war then Americans, Iraqis and the international community must hold President Bush and Vice President Cheney responsible for the destruction of Iraq.

The CIA, the State Department, members of Congress and countless Middle East experts warned Bush and Cheney— to no avail— that toppling Saddam could unleash the demons of civil war. They said so before the war, during it and in the aftermath, and each time the warnings were dismissed. Those warnings came from people like Paul Pillar, the CIA veteran who served as the U.S. intelligence community’s chief Middle East analyst, from Wayne White, the State Department’s chief intelligence analyst on Iraq and from two CIA Baghdad station chiefs who were purged for their analysis. Pillar, who wrote this month in Foreign Affairs that pre-war intelligence on Iraq was distorted by the Bush-Cheney team, is being excoriated by the right.

Keen observers have pointed out for some time that the mission Mr Bush claims God sent him on was flawed. One just doesn’t “civilize” and “Christianize” a country by the sword. It didn’t work in the Middle Ages and it won’t work in the 21st century. All those who actually knew what Iraq was like – those who invested their lives in learning about the Middle East in general, and Iraq in particular - were sneeringly despised, and vilified when they dared to speak up, interjecting that what those armchair Napoleons lied and schemed about couldn’t happen. Excoriated with all the sycophancy the RWNM is famous for, which by the way is standard operating procedure with nay-sayers of any stripe. The basic rule is: when confronted with facts, ramp up the volume four notches and begin the ad hominem attacks.

James Wolcott has some thoughts on all that:

Poor President Bush, prince of fools. He let the neoconservative creative destructors play upon his religiosity (and Cheney's power hunger) and persuade him that the overthrow of Saddam Hussein would be a transformative moment that would set democracy and freedom in motion across the region, and crown him in history with Churchillian honor. I believe Bush wanted democracy in Iraq, or convinced himself that he believed it after the Chalabi-as-chess-king scheme fell through, because such belief flatters his pride in his own idealism. But the intellectual architects of the policy didn't care. If there was peace and stability in the new Iraq that would strength America's power in the region and bolster Israeli security, fine; if Iraq fissured into factional strife, fire, and chaos, better still.

I’m a bit more sanguine than Mr Wolcott, but sadly not as eloquent. For the True Believers of PNAC this was the Holy Grail of American Weltpolitik for the 21st and 22nd century. Given the ebbing of world power exercised by the Soviet Union after the breakup of that political entity, they saw an opportunity to sew up a large portion of geography by creating an overseas empire before China began casting farther afield for spheres of influence. Energized by their exploding economy, the Chinese would soon be starving for new sources of raw materials, as Japan was in the 1930s, and there was a fairly small window if opportunity. Mr Bush, of course, was driven by a simpler goal: money for himself and his cronies, and the political power that money provides.
Mr Dreyfuss again:

"For the most radical-right neoconservative Jacobins amongst the Bush-Cheney team, the possibility that Iraq might fall apart wasn’t even alarming: they just didn’t care, and in their obsessive zeal to overthrow Saddam Hussein they were more than willing to take the risk. David Wurmser, who migrated from the Israeli-connected Washington Institute on Near East Policy to the American Enterprise Institute to the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans to John Bolton’s arms control shop at the State Department to Dick Cheney’s shadow National Security Council in the Office of the Vice President from 2001 to 2006, wrote during the 1990s that Iraq after Saddam was likely to descend into violent tribal, ethnic and sectarian war.
"In a paper for an Israeli think tank, the same think tank for which Wurmser, Richard Perle and Douglas Feith prepared the famous 'Clean Break' paper in 1996, Wurmser wrote in 1997 : 'The residual unity of the nation is an illusion projected by the extreme repression of the state.' After Saddam, Iraq would 'be ripped apart by the politics of warlords, tribes, clans, sects, and key families,' he wrote. 'Underneath facades of unity enforced by state repression, [Iraq’s] politics is defined primarily by tribalism, sectarianism, and gang/clan-like competition.' Yet Wurmser explicitly urged the United States and Israel to 'expedite' such a collapse. 'The issue here is whether the West and Israel can construct a strategy for limiting and expediting the chaotic collapse that will ensue in order to move on to the task of creating a better circumstance.'

So they knew the chaos was coming, planned for it, and indeed implemented it in every way possible. Chaos provides distraction, diverts the eye from what is really happening. Many of us are hardly surprised to see these thoughts finally articulated.

"Such black neoconservative fantasies—which view the Middle East as a chessboard on which they can move the pieces at will—have now come home to roost. For the many hundreds of thousands who might die in an Iraqi civil war, the consequences are all too real."

The deaths of hundreds of thousands are of little consequence when measured against the economic gains planned by these people.

A couple of items percolated up through the post-5 PM Friday bad news dump:

Daily Kos diarist Susan G brings us mixed tidings about that whole “training the Iraqi Army to stand up so we can stand down” thing:

So much for fearless leader's repeated recounting of how great that training of Iraqi forces is going.

Pentagon: Iraqi troops downgraded

No Iraqi battalion capable of fighting without U.S. support

The only Iraqi battalion capable of fighting without U.S. support has been downgraded to a level requiring them to fight with American troops backing them up, the Pentagon said Friday.

The battalion, made up of 700 to 800 Iraqi Army soldiers, has repeatedly been offered by the U.S. as an example of the growing independence of the Iraqi military.

The competence of the Iraqi military has been cited as a key factor in when U.S. troops will be able to return home.

Funny, just last month, Bush said, "Today, 125 combat battalions are fighting the enemy, and 50 of those are in the lead. That's progress."

What he forgot to tell us in January was that only one of those battalions was capable of fighting without U.S. support.

And as of today, there are zero.

Somehow I don't think our troops will be coming home for Christmas ... even Christmas 2008.

Well, that’s a fine how-do-you-do. And here we thought things were going so well, and that the troops would be brought home, or at least deployed elsewhere in the Middle East, and we were beginning to kick the curb over all those millions and billions we’ve spent building those 14 10 4 “enduring bases” that weren’t going to be occupied by US forces. I guess they’ll be staying a lot longer.

On the other hand, the return of US troops to the Heimat would permit Mr Bush to declare martial law next year after the terrorist catastrophe, and suspend the mid-term congressional elections, if it looked really grim for the Republican Party. With no other trustworthy military available other than the surely by then Evangelized Air Force to sweep the civil rights dissenters off the streets, things might get a bit politically dangerous.

But, just when you start to really worry, the clouds break just enough to display a silver lining:

Through our good friends over at E Pluribus Media:

January 10, 2006

BLACKWATER USA UNVEILS NEW SUBSIDIARY

Blackwater Airships, LLC Is The Newest Addition To The Firm's Security Portfolio

Moyock, NC - The national security of the United States depends upon innovative and flexible solutions in the global war on terror. Blackwater USA, the world's premier security, peace and stability operations firm recently unveiled its plans to create a new subsidiary; Blackwater Airships.

Blackwater Airship's initial focus will be the development and deployment of small remotely piloted airship vehicles (RPAVs) that can operate from 5,000 - 15,000 feet, move and hover, and stay aloft for up to four days. The airships will be equipped with state-of-the-art surveillance and detection equipment that can detect, record, and communicate in real time to friendly forces the movement and activities of terrorists.

Gary Jackson, president of Blackwater USA said, "This project is in keeping with Blackwater's support of peace and security throughout the world."

Follow-on phases of the project will include larger airships that will carry tons of payload in support of remote humanitarian and peacekeeping missions. Blackwater, who is already involved in stability operations throughout the world, continues to innovate in support of peace and security, and freedom and democracy everywhere.
The first Blackwater Airship will be available in December 2006.

Blackwater is committed to supporting national and international security policies that protect those who are defenseless and provide a free voice for all. Other Blackwater subsidiaries include: Blackwater Training Center, Blackwater Target Systems, Blackwater Security Consulting, Blackwater Canine, and Raven Development Group.

For more information, please visit ww.blackwaterusa.com.

Yes, that was national and international security.

Looks like we just might have our Sturmabteilung – one of the few missing pieces in the analogy to Weimar Republic, 1932.

Thomas Kean is a "moderate" Republican - a species believed to have been extinct - that now seems to be once again emerging from the Bu$hCo-induced hibernation of irrelevancy. He was a Governor of New Jersey, and was chairman of the 9/11 Commission that Mr Bush fought so hard to not establish. The 9/11 Commission actually was (almost) even handed in its approach to the tragedy, despite Mr Bush's desire that no inconvenient facts (ie.the truth) slid into public purview.

A report today contains the following tidbits:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration said Friday it won't reconsider its approval for a United Arab Emirates company to take over significant operations at six U.S. ports. The former head of the Sept. 11 commission said the deal "never should have happened."

Opponents, including the agency that runs New York and New Jersey ports, took their case to court, while the company, Dubai Ports World, stepped up efforts to change the minds of congressional critics.

The president's national security adviser said the White House would keep trying to persuade lawmakers - there's more time since the company offered to delay its takeover - but the administration wouldn't reconsider its approval.

"There are questions raised in the Congress, and what this delay allows is for those questions to be addressed on the Hill," Stephen Hadley said. "There's nothing to reopen."

Stephen Hadley, of course, is still looking over his shoulder, expecting to hear from Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald about his part in the creation of the fraudulent intelligence that Mr Bush waved around to conflate 9/11, Osama bin Laden, Iraq, and Saddam Hussein.

Mr Hadley seems to feel that, with the waiting period that DPW has so generously allowed, there will be a chance to grab Senators quietly by the arm and (possibly) discuss "rumors" running around Washington regarding that sprightly young intern or that "surprising" financial deal. Just one of the advanatges of claiming you can wiretap ANY American ANY time you want to.

And here's the interesting thing about the beauty of being a "moderate" Republican though. You don't have to drink the Kool-Aid. Most especially if you've been a straight shooter as Mr Kean has. You do your public job properly, pay attention to the legalities, in other words be a relatively honest politician, and you can say things like this:

"It shouldn't have happened, it never should have happened," Kean said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

The quicker the Bush administration can get out of the deal, the better, he said. "There's no question that two of the 9/11 hijackers came from there and money was laundered through there," Kean said.

From our point of view, we don't want foreigners controlling our ports," Kean said. "From their point of view, this is a legitimate company that had a legitimate bid and won, and here are all these congressmen saying all these things about not wanting this company. It looks to them like it's anti-Arab."

"I think this deal is going to be killed," Kean said. "The question is how much damage is this going to do to us before it's killed."

Special thanks to Joe at AMERICAblog for pointing this out.

So, there’s a lot going on around the internets about the now notorious sale of the P&O company to Dubai Ports World company, which is owned by the government of the United Arab Emirates.

Many of you know about P&O – the once-famous British shipping company that handled transportation from Great Britain (or “England” as it was commonly referred to during the Victorian era) out to India. The quality were housed in staterooms and cabins on the port side outward bound to India and on the starboard side when homeward bound. That’s how the English language got the term “posh.” Acronym.

The Peninsular and Orient Steam Navigation Company knew its priorities back then. Always make sure the elite get treated best. And of course, the tradition lives on. John Snow sells his CSX holdings before the rail company collapses into penny stocks, and the CSH rail terminals get picked up by P&O. John Snow gets himself a seat on the Board. This is a Secretary of the Treasury, mind you. A cabinet official. David Sanborn, the former director of DPW’s Europe and Latin America operations get selected by Mr Bush to chair the US Maritime Administration. They’re the folks designated to oversee all US port operations.

Oh! I forgot. The UAE, the United Arab Emirates, a grouping of once-small grease spots on the Persian Gulf merged into one governmental entity on February 12, 1971 The former independent emirates of Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Sharjah, Amjan, Umm Al-Qaiwain, Ras Al-Khaimah, and Fujairah become one great big commercial investment company.

And, floating on oil and the sale and transportation payments the oil creates, they have invested in just about everything except my mortgage. Why, just last year, the Dubai International Capital, which is owned by the government of the UAE, bought an interest in the Carlyle Group with an $8 Billion-with-a-B investment.

When I hear “Carlyle Group” the first thing I think is “George H W Bush," who’s earned a few million dollars fronting for them. But that’s not the only Bush connection to the UAE. Neil Bush, who has some venereal disease for which there is no cure, allegedly sells some phoney-baloney education software, with a nice bit of start-up capital from the UAE.

Now, when the furore started a couple of days ago about DPW taking over operations of some of our ports, we were told many things. It’s only six ports; it’s just management of the shipping areas; the UAE is our bestest friend in the whole wide world; Mr Bush never knew about the sale until the news broke but he wholeheartedly endorses the sale;

Well, I know this will be a big surprise to everyone, but all of that was a misstatement incorrect inaccurate like everything Mr Bush says, a lie as cheap as a Persian rug in an Algerian bordello.

It’s 21 ports, including two Gulf ports through which just about all of our overseas military traffic is transported. It’s not just management; the lessee is legally required to maintain security control of the port area. The UAE was the starting point for most financial support of the 9/11 suicide attackers. Additionally, 2 of the 9/11 attackers were UAE citizens. The UAE royal family has a documented history of close personal and social relationships with not just the bin Laden family, because billionaires are all brothers under the skin, regardless of nationality. They also have a documented history of close personal and social relationships with the alleged black sheep of the family, Osama. They’ve been reported to go hawking with Osama in Afghanistan and Pakistan. After 9/11, the US requested the UAE to make their banking records available for examination in order to trace the accounts of the 9/11 attackers, in order to discover the original paymaster, and we were refused access. It’s also documented that the USS Cole bombers received their financing through UAE banking organs.

Mr Bush, who is never responsible for anything that happens on his watch, has claimed he never knew about the sale of P&O to DPW until it was finalized. He says this, despite the fact that such sales are required by US law to be investigated by a little known US Intelligence organ – the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States. This committee apparently never studied the sale. Mr Snow, who is chairman of the Committee, says he never knew of the sale until it was announced publicly. Imagine that: the committee approved the sale without ever meeting. That cover story lasted about two hours. Then we were told that the deal was approved by some low-level assistants to the committee. More bad apples making the Bu$h maladministration look bad! Just like at Abu Ghraib!

So, we have Mr Bush’s specious guarantee that the people who helped transfer the funds that were used to murder over 3,000 Americans, is considered perfectly safe to protect 21 vital American ports. Mr Bush guarantees that the people who refused to help us track down the financiers who bankrolled 9/11 are trustworthy to handle our inbound and outbound ocean freight. Perfectly safe. They’ve been investigated.

I’m satisfied, aren’t you?

Bill Maher has apparently been running some kind of Richard Bruce Cheny poetry contest, and some of the entries have appeared here and there on the internets. Even though I'm partial to the elegance of haiku I rather like this one, which I shamelessly stole lifted found on Crooks and Liars:

On Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

What happened in the missing hour?
What'd they do in their ivory tower?
Did they find it was a crime
and that Cheney could do time?
Did they ask: "What if he dies?
"What of your two D.U.I.s?"
Did they think he could do years?
That it better be _one_ beer?
And was it in that hour,
Dick said, "I'll meet the cops tomorrow"?
Was it then they decided,
it was better to hide it?
"It sure's good to be the Vice."
I'll say. Wouldn't it be nice?

Today, February 23, 2006 is the anniversary of a great moment in the history of the United States.

It was on this date that US Marines raised a flag, symbolizing conquest, over Mt Suribachi on Iwo Jima. Although the battle raged on for days afterwards, this visible sign of success was a magic moment. The moment was captured on film by a Marine cameraman, Sgt Louis R Lowery.

There were two flag raisings, the first a small flag carried in a Marine's backpack, later replaced by a larger flag which could be seen from much of the island. It is this second photograph, by a civilian photographer Joe Rosenthal, which is memorialized in history: the Marine Corps War Memorial.

From Wikipedia:

The Secretary of the Navy, James Forrestal, had decided the previous night that he wanted to go ashore and witness the final stage of the fight for the mountain. Now, under a stern commitment to take order from Howlin' Mad Smith, the secretary was churning ashore in the company of the blunt, earthy general. Their boat touched the beach just after the flag went up, and the mood among the high command turned jubilant. Gazing upward, at the red, white, and blue speck, Forrestal remarked to Smith: 'Holland, the raising of that flag on Suribachi means a Marine Corps for the next five hundred years'.

The battle for this strategically important island cost the lives of more than 26,000 Americans. The assault involved the 4th and 5th Merine divisions. The 28th Marines were ordered to assault and capture Mt Suribachi. Of the 3,400 Marines in the 28th Regiment, only 600 were still standing and available for duty after the battle was concluded.

All honor to the leathernecks of Iwo Jima, living and dead. And to their brothers all over the world.

Capitol Hill (yeah – I know) reports this morning that Secret Service agents in Mr Cheney’s security detail have filed multiple reports that Mr Cheney was drinking on the hunt and was in fact as drunk as a Republican left alone in a cash room at a casino.

Agents observed several members of the hunting party, including the Vice President, consuming alcohol before and during the hunting expedition, the report notes, and Cheney exhibited "visible signs" of impairment, including slurred speech and erratic actions. According to those who have talked with the agents and others present at the outing, Cheney was drunk when he gunned down his friend and the day-and-a-half delay in allowing Texas law enforcement officials on the ranch where the shooting occurred gave all members of the hunting party time to sober up.

One agent at the scene has been placed on administrative leave and another requested reassignment this week. A memo reportedly written by one agent has been destroyed, sources said Wednesday afternoon.

Now, there are many reasons why an agent might be put on administrative leave, up to, and including moral disgust at being required to sacrifice his own life to save an ethical swamp like Mr Cheney. And agents do in fact rotate in and out of personal security details. The Service feels it’s essential to get people out of what is a very high stress detail and put them back on the street where they can concern themselves with crushing crime, rather than enabling it.

A destroyed memo? Fascinating. This entire story has to be moved forward. With sufficient repetition, the good puppy press will cause additional details to be teased out of the festering bog of lies, obfuscations and plausible denials that is the Bu$h maladministration.

Secret Service officials also took possession of all tests on Whittington's blood at the hospitals where he was treated for his wounds. When asked if a blood alcohol test had been performed on Whittington, the doctors who treated him at Christus Spohn Hospital Memorial in Corpus Christi or the hospital in Kingsville refused to answer. One admits privately he was ordered by the Secret Service to "never discuss the case with the press."

Some say that Capitol Blue has a poor track record for accuracy. That may be. However, contrary to the CW espoused by some in the Democratic Party this is not an issue whose day has come and gone. It’s essential to hammer home every point, every day in order to wake up a voting public put to sleep by years of complicit MSM collaboration with the Republicans.

Thanks to an elegant scribbler, the single adjective TBogg, known associate of two double-adjectived females.

Raymond Shaw is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.

This theme really should be pushed forward into the public consciousness, if that is, this here internets thing can be considered "public."

My deepest apologies to the descendants of Rudyard Kipling for borrowing a title that deserves a far better referrant than the coward inhabiting our Oval Office.

If you don't read Eric Alterman every weekday you're missing the talents of a man whose stance spans several areas of competence. And, since he's one of those America-hating, flag-desecrating, baby-murdering, liberals who want to force every child to become gay or lesbian, he actually has comments on his blog online magazine.

And his commenters have brains, too:

Dr. A, Rove wants to frame Bush's warrantless wire-tapping as though the issue were whether or not the U.S. government can spy on terrorists. This is ridiculous. Of course we can and should spy on terrorists. Who in their right mind would oppose that? The real issue is a much bigger one: Do we want a president or do we want a king? If we want a president, then he must be subject to constraints as the Founders envisioned. He must come under oversight. He must be checked and balanced. Once we lift these constraints, he can do whatever he wants and becomes a king. If he can spy on the "bad guys" without a court order, then there is absolutely nothing to stop him from spying on the "good guys" or anyone he considers to be a political enemy. Legally, spying via wire taps is equivalent to search and seizure. When King George III of England did this to American colonists without an independent authority declaring it reasonable, the Continental Congress found it so offensive as to list it in the Declaration of Independence as a crime justifying the American Revolution. Do we want a president or do we want a king? Bush and his enablers and his supporters want a king, whether they admit it or not, whether they realize it or not. And it is up to those of us who want Our Presidency back to stop them. Let's start by making sure everyone knows the question.

We've said it before. Let's say it again. Mr Bush's orders to the NSA were to spy on Americans talking to other Americans. This FISA contretemps is not about enabling terrorists. It's about clamping an iron hand of suppression and control over internal dissent.

How do I know this? Because Mr Bush and his criminal Republican Party say otherwise. They lie. With every breath they take. With every move they make.

They'll be watching you.

If a Republican shakes your hand and says "Good morning" to you, count the fingers on your hand three times to make sure you've still got five, and then go home and put on your jammies, because you can be sure it's time for beddies.

If you've ever doubted that Republicans who tell you to "support the troops" really just want you to quit saying bad stuff about Bush, this is the story for you (via Rakkasan).

Nearly three years ago, someone in the community started a memorial to the teenage Marine killed in Iraq. It started with a large photograph and people added flags, flowers, cards and rosaries. The family surrounded it with some white bricks.

Andy was laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery, so this was the nearest place for Norma and Oscar to see their son.

Norma Aviles, Marine's mother:
"It is Andy there. His picture... I used to come to clean his picture, wipe his face. And it used to bring memories of wiping his face when he was a little boy."

They came every week with flowers. But on Valentine's Day, their hearts were broken once again. The memorial was gone. Someone had swept the place clean. No picture, no flowers, no flag, and no respect.

Norma Aviles, Marine’s mother:
"Oh, it was like somebody really put a knife in my heart."

Oscar Aviles, Marine’s father:
"My heart dropped. It was very, very painful. And I still feel the pain."

The Aviles' say state and city workers didn’t remove the memorial. So with President Bush here on Friday, the couple speculates that perhaps someone is trying to shield the President’s eyes from the reality of war.

Oscar Aviles, Marine’s father:
”I would hate to think that is the reason, and I’m hoping it isn’t”

Sad.

(Crossposted at Nitpicker.)

There’s a popular theory floating around the internets that Iraq is really just a business deal. A deal that’s gone sour, mind you, but still just “binniss,” as they say down in Texas, where the ‘oi-ahhh-lll’ industry hangs its 27 gallon hat.

We know that even before the Bu$h malAdministration seized the White House they had secret meetings with some shadowy figures from the oil patch about the country’s new “energy policy”. Mr Cheney was in charge of that, just like he’s put himself in charge of the most shadowy, secret back room dealings for years.

Vice President Richard Cheney's persistent imbroglio during the Junior Bush regime has been with his National Energy Policy Development Group (created by Executive Order) through which during the early months of 2001 he was taking dictation from Enron and studying petro maps of Iraq, and wants to keep all those notes a secret.

"At issue is whether Cheney allowed private energy lobbyists and big-name campaign contributors to participate in the work of the group, and if so, whether that information should be made public."

These meetings were the subject of a lawsuit by several interest groups, allied with some media organs, asking for transparency. A Federal appeals court ruled the meetings can stay secret, on the theory that energy policy is part of national security. You can hear some of the story here.

It was during this series of meetings that the plan to divide Iraq’s oilfields was put together. The oil companies, among them Exxon Mobil, Conoco, Shell Oil, and BP America, all had a hand in planning the division of Iraq into what was planned to be the privatization of a country. Halliburton and its subdivision, Kellogg, Brown and Root was, of course, represented by Mr. Cheney. Several other companies, such as Chevron, were not present but submitted detailed energy policy recommendations of how they should be able to “wet their beaks” at the feast.

All that was needed was the reason to start the takeover, and Mr Cheney’s shadowy “Team B,” Ahmed Chalabi and “curveball” provided that, while a compliant good puppy MSM served as the megaphone.

So, Big Oil got their new production reserves. But what did it cost?
As of today 2,273 Americans killed and 16,653 wounded, according to figures provided by the Department of Defense. [Ed: soldiers wounded in Iraq/Afghanistan who are medevaced to other locations and subsequently die are not included in these figures.]

At least 100,000 Iraqi civilians dead, and undoubtedly many, many thousands more wounded, and crippled for life. These figures of course are only estimates since dead Iraqis have no meaning to Bu$hCo, unless they can be claimed as “insurgents.” If American forces are involved in any form of ground combat, the bodies that dot the landscape afterwards are always “insurgents.” Even the 9 and 10 year olds. Viet Nam era veterans are familiar with this form of military accounting.

We’ve also lost a lot of vehicles. A Knight Ridder report, published in the Salt Lake City Tribune reveals that the Army has also lost:

20 M1 Abrams tanks; 50 Bradley fighting vehicles; 20 Stryker wheeled combat vehicles; 20 M113 armored personnel carriers; 250 Humvees; and some 500 Fox wheeled reconnaissance vehicles, mine clearing vehicles and heavy- and medium-transport trucks and trailers. The bulk of these losses in tracked and wheeled vehicles were to the ubiquitous improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, that the insurgents employ to such deadly purpose. To that equipment toll, for both Afghanistan and Iraq, add 27 Apache attack helicopters; 21 Blackhawk utility helicopters; 23 Kiowa Warrior assault helicopters; and 14 big Chinook cargo helicopters. Only 17 of the helicopter losses are counted as combat downings. The rest were destroyed in accidents. This information and these figures are courtesy of The Army Times weekly newspaper, Feb. 20 issue, with thanks.

The cost for replacing those totally destroyed vehicles and overhauling thousands more worn out by heavy use totals $9 billion in this year's proposed defense budget and in the off-budget emergency wartime supplemental budget Congress passes twice each fiscal year.

That’s a lot of iron. These babies are expensive, because the military industrial complex spends a lot of money on wining and dining Army procurement officers, Senators, Congressmen, and DOD civilian officials. All that soft bribery has to come out of profits, so the prices are very high.

In addition to replacing the totally destroyed vehicles, the Army is faced with near-total rebuilding jobs on literally thousands of other Abrams tanks, Bradleys, M113s, Humvees, trucks and aircraft that have been worn out by heavy use in the combat zones. The wear and tear on those vehicles is estimated at five times normal peacetime use, and that wear factor is cumulative as the war drags on. Last year the Army's Materiel Command and its contractors overhauled 230 Abrams tanks. This year they expect to overhaul more than 700 of the huge tanks. Bradleys go from last year's 318 overhauls to this year's 600. Overhauls of Humvees, which totaled 5,000 in 2005, will hit 9,000 in fiscal 2006.

Equipment can be repaired or replaced. But nothing can replace a father or mother who has been killed in this war, or any war. Nothing can compensate for all the lives shattered when a soldier dies in combat. In Iraq it is estimated that the human toll includes nearly 1,000 spouses who have been left behind, alone, and more than 2,000 children who have lost a parent to the war.

Nor can you repair or replace what has been lost by hundreds of soldiers severely injured by powerful IED blasts and left double or triple amputees, blind or brain damaged, riddled by shrapnel. For them, and those who love them, life suddenly has become an unending struggle.

Just part of the cost of doing “binniss” in Big Oi-ahhh-lll.

Remember back during the Vietnam War, the whole "hearts and minds" campaign? You know, the one that said we have to win their hearts and minds to get them to trust us? I personally don't remember it due to my age, but I've heard enough about it to have a pretty good idea what it was about. Well, it looks like we have another "hearts and minds" campaign that has been going on since the beginning of this fiasco. But there's a new hitch: Al Qaeda does it better than us (from CNN.com).

According to Defense Secretary Rumsfeld, and I quote:

Modernization is crucial to winning the hearts and minds of Muslims worldwide who are bombarded with negative images of the West, Rumsfeld told the Council on Foreign Relations.

The Pentagon chief said today's weapons of war included e-mail, Blackberries, instant messaging, digital cameras and Web logs, or blogs.

What is troubling about these statements is how ridiculous they are. In a country as poor as Iraq is now, how many people do you think are carrying around Blackberries or have high-speed internet in their homes so they can publish their blog? Hell, we haven't even secured the country's infrastructure yet and it's coming up on 3 years! What Rumsfeld and the rest of the clowns in the Bush Administration don't get is this: We are losing the so-called "hearts and minds" because they hate our policies, not because we "aren't spending enough on publicity"! The same reasons why we couldn't win the hearts and minds in Vietnam apply here with regards to Iraq. It is our policies toward those in the Muslim community and other Arab states that they hate. If we showed them a bit of respect and actually tried to see things from their point of view instead of calling them a part of an "axis of evil", we might fare a little better.

If this Administration could be trusted, things like this wouldn't be a problem. But it is a problem. Specifically because they can't be trusted. How many times since we invaded in 2003 has the message from the Whitehouse changed about why we went to war? First, it was because Saddam had WMDs and we didn't want the "smoking gun" to come in the form of a mushroom cloud. Next we heard that Iraq was tied to 9/11. Then it was to facilitate regime change so freedom and democracy could be spread throughout the Middle East. And we expect these people to believe us when we hand out our propaganda or drop it from airplanes? The fact of the matter is that our version of "freedom" and "democracy" may not necessarily be what the people of Iraq want. Just look at their election results if you need further proof. Holding elections and everyone who votes getting an ink-stained purple finger may be a great thing, but it doesn't necessarily mean that "freedom is on the march". The recent Palestinian elections that put Hamas in power are proof of that. Even Iraq's own elections are proof of that.

If we want to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, we need to change our policies toward Arab countries in the Middle East. Plain and simple. We need to speak language that they understand and I don't mean Arabic. We need to show them that their concerns are our concerns and then take steps to address them. We need to work with them rather than against them. That is how we'll win the hearts and minds, not hiring a top-notch PR firm to utilize modern technology to keep telling them the same things we've been saying over and over.

The bottom line is that "Hearts and Minds" didn't work then and it won't work now.

Read this and other rants by Bulldog at The Bulldog Says...

From Prison Planet:

The Patriot Act was written before September 11. Here is a link to the bill H.R. 3162 (Patriot Act) on the Library of Congress website:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:H.R.3162: (If this link is only a temporary link and doesn't work for some reason or another, just search the Library of Congress website for bill number "hr 3162" of the 107th Congress, then click "Text of Legislation".)

There will 4 links to 4 different versions of this bill. Click the fourth link [H.R.3162.ENR] and then Click "Beginning" just above Section 1. The date is not written numerically. It is written in words. It is written in there as "Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, the third day of January, two thousand and one". Based on this wording it would seem that it was created on January 3, 2001, over 8 months before September 11! Then only "after" the "terrorist attacks" was it finally introduced into the House at an "opportunistic" time. It's also interesting that it says to "deter and punish terrorist acts in the United States and around the world" when September 11 hadn't even happened yet. Congressman James Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin has got some explaining to do since he sponsored the Patriot Act "before" September 11 !!! Whether someone around him created the legislation and manipulated him or whether he is some how connected, an investigation needs to be done into this bill.

Amazing. And here I always thought they just cobbled it all together very quuickly.

Who would have ever guessed?

The NY Times is reporting this morning that Senator Pat Roberts, chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, wants to reach some sort of compromise with the White House regarding the illegal, extra-constitutional electronic spying of Americans that has continued non-stop since Mr Bush ordered the NSA to begin such surveillance in the aftermath of the Bush malAdministration’s first disastrous failure: 9/11.

While Senator Mike DeWine is hard at work preparing to put his name at the top of a new bill Inquisitor General Abu Gonzalez is writing to retroactively authorize the electronic surveillance which is illegal under the FISA stature, Senator Roberts was detailed to throw a little more sand into the air.

The chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said Friday that he wanted the Bush administration's domestic eavesdropping program brought under the authority of a special intelligence court, a move President Bush has argued is not necessary. The chairman, Senator Pat Roberts, Republican of Kansas, said he had some concerns that the court could not issue warrants quickly enough to keep up with the needs of the eavesdropping program. But he said he would like to see those details worked out.

It’s unusual that they’re still beating the urgency gong, since it’s been well-established that the FISA court has functioned institutionally almost as co-operatively as the good puppy press of the MSM. If memory serves, they’ve denied 3 warrant requests in the last 6 years, and slightly modified 4 others in the last 8 years.

"I think it should come before the FISA court, but I don't know how it works," Mr. Roberts said. "You don't want to have a situation where you have capability that doesn't work well with the FISA court, in terms of speed and agility and hot pursuit. So we have to solve that problem."

Stupendous claims to the contrary, what’s basically required is an affidavit of submission signed by a Deputy or Assistant Attorney General indicating that there is a strong belief that ( Fill in the name) of (Fill in the address, if known) is believed to represent a threat to the national security of the United States insofar as (he/she/it/they) are believed to be in contact with (Fill in the name) who has been designated as a threat to the national security of the United States. The DAG or AAG then signs his name on the bottom of the page. Corroborating affidavits from FBI, CIA, and/or NSA are then attached. I have to admit I’m not quite sure whether the form has an oath enactment printed on it, but – what the heck – this is national security, right? Everyone knows a DAG or AAG of the Bush Department of Justice would never lie.

In just about every case: rubber stamp. I’m not claiming the FISA court judges are tools; they do in fact examine what circumstances are presented to them, and they may well have been quite judiciously lenient heretofore. The stats do speak for themselves.

Then it became public knowledge that not only were we surveilling bad guys overseas, but we were observing them contact people inside the US, so naturally, those contacted also had to be monitored. And therein the problem since the FISA law covered external surveillance. So Mr Bush just instructed the NSA to open up the taps on American communications. We call all of this “wiretap” but that’s not quite accurate, since they’re monitoring electronic communication: telephone, computer and (undoubtedly) cell phones.

The question that should next arise, is : just who is being monitored inside the US? Is it just people who have contact with known al Quaeda entities? Is it just people who have overseas contacts? Are these people monitored when they have contact with other people inside the US? And once your “name” comes up on the “list” by being contacted by someone else are you then scrutinized at all times?

This sort of contact tree becomes an administrator’s nightmare: there are limited resources for monitoring and you just can’t successfully listen in to everyone, so you try to maximize your resource expenditure, and monitor your most likely targets.

Mass surveillance can work against the monitoring agency because they will lose the wheat in the chaff.

Those of us who have watched the Bush malAdministration closely over the last 5 years have formed a rather cynical view that the political opportunists within the government have seized upon this program to monitor those they consider the REAL threat: political opponents, such as Democratic Congressmen, journalists and public dissenters. Let’s face it: this program is a ‘gimme’ for them. And this sort of spying is completely illegal under the FISA statutes.

White House officials favor a proposal offered by another Republican senator, Mike DeWine of Ohio, whose bill would exempt the eavesdropping from the intelligence court. Mr. DeWine wants small subcommittees to oversee the wiretapping, but Mr. Roberts said he would like the full House and Senate Intelligence Committees to have regular briefings.

This would be the bill currently being prepared by the Inquisitor General. Senator DeWine has been threatened by a strong challenge for his seat from Sherrod Brown and Paul Hackett, who was neatly excised from the race this week by Democratic Party leaders. So DeWine was thrilled when offered the opportunity to write his name on the top of the bill, thereby being guaranteed a strong push by the White House in his upcoming race for re-election.

It’s fascinating to note that the White House has been insisting that Mr Bush has the authority under the “Unitary Executive” theory to do anything he feels like as long as he claims its for national security. The spying on Americans, whether true security threats or merely political opponents is illegal under the FISA law and the Constitution. Mr Gonzalez’s new law will retroactively permit what Mr Bush has been doing for five years.

“No bill of attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.” US Constitution, Art 1, Sec 9

“No state shall enter into any treaty, alliance, or confederation; grant letters of marque and reprisal; coin money; emit bills of credit; make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts; pass any bill of attainder, ex post facto law…” US Constitution, Art 1, Sec 10.

Because nothing that happens inside the Bu$hCo can really stand the light of day, Mr Cheney has been strangely silent for days about how it came about that he shot a friend, Republican Party big bucks donor Harry Whittington in the face last Saturday.

It took 22 hours to work out the full, complete details of the initial coverup before Mrs Armstrong, who was the hostess of the 2 men/ 2 women “shooting party” contacted a friendly local newspaper to slip out the word that Mr Whittington had been damned near killed by a careless “hunter” on her private ranch. It appears that within 90 minutes of the shooting, Karl Rove was on the phone with Ms Armstrong, undoubtedly telling her which line of bullshit to start out with, and what invented story to present if and when the first invented story fell apart.

The White House, of course, has steadily and incompetently lied throughout the entire matter, even as American press representatives protest that they’re not being spoonfed lies that are believable and consistent. We all know the good puppy press wants to do the right thing and shovel this mess under the carpet as soon as possible, because there is no Democrat to blame this on.

No, the only one to blame here is Mr. Cheney, who arranged to spend a weekend at a private ranch in Texas, away from Mrs Cheney, with another woman. Let’s be sensible adults here. Two men and two women do NOT sleep in four bedrooms, mm-kay? Will it really require a 13 year investigation with three special prosecutors, totaling more than $90 million to establish that, like President Clinton, Mr Cheney was fucking around on his wife? I won’t criticize him for the adultery, because I have no idea what sort of understanding he has with Mrs Cheney. It’s just not my business, but I’m sure the good puppy press has already decided to give him a pass on this.

Now let’s look at one of the primary reasons for shooting accidents: alcohol. First we were told that the party drank “Dr Pepper” at their picnic. That lie lasted about 9 hours, I think, and then we heard that there may have been a beer or two at the picnic, but Mrs Armstrong just couldn’t remember whether anyone drank any. Please.

Obligatory personal disclosure: both my parents were alcoholics. My father died of cirrhosis of the liver, which is not caused by high blood pressure. My mother got dry and stayed sober through 31 years, with the grace of God and the help of AA. When I was 11 years old she was dragging me off to AA meetings so I could learn about the dangers of alcohol, because there is none so zealous as the converted. I learned about the chemical and psychological causes of alcoholism, and know all the faux excuses about why someone can drink, and in full denial, state emphatically that they aren’t drunks. The “only one beer” is a classic copout. Ask any policeman who’s ever stopped someone for erratic driving.

Because the lies just keep coming with Bu$hCo, Mr Cheney apparently had to wait a few days before publicly stating that he had indeed shot his friend and had, in fact, had “only one beer” before shooting him.

It’s interesting, although hardly surprising, that Mr Cheney didn’t want to actually disclose this information to a journalist, or a reporter, or someone with the investigatory instincts greater than those of a dead goat. So he appeared on Fox News this afternoon, catching pre-scripted questions carefully lobbed by Brit Hume. They weren’t softballs; more like nerf balls.

But he did say he is personally responsible for what happened. Let’s see how that story changes if Mr Whittington dies, and there is an (obligatory) grand jury.

I've discussed the Bu$hCo incompetence in the past, and I've said we're going to see another city savaged, most likely this summer or early autumn, just before the mid-term elections.

Mike Sheuer agrees with me.

The prophet's guidance is that you go the extra mile to warn your enemy. Bin Laden was called on the carpet by his peers in the Islamic militant movement for three things. One was that he didn't give us enough warning. He's now addressed the American people on five separate occasions since 2002. So he's taken care of that one. He was also called on the carpet for not offering us a chance to convert to Islam. He's now done that three separate times, and Zawahiri has done it once. So they've covered that angle. The other thing they were taken to task for was that they didn't have the religious authority to kill as many Americans as they did. In the summer of 2003, he got a religious judgment from a very reputable Saudi cleric that he could use weapons of mass destruction, specifically nuclear weapons, to kill up to 10 million Americans.

After 9/11, he had several very important loose ends to tie up, in religious terms, before he could attack us again. He's done all of those things. It's interesting, because he spoke on the eve of our presidential election, and he said, This is the last time I'm going to warn you. In his speech last week, he said, I was not going to talk to you again, but your president is lying to you. I wanted to give you one more opportunity to hear the truth. He again warned us about the impact of our policies, and then offered us the truce.

Scheuer is a man I'd listen to. He established the bin Laden study unit 10 years ago, while working for the CIA. Like any good strategist, he's followed the wisdom of Sun Tzu; he's studied his opponent, and learned how he thinks.

...[W]riting as "Anonymous," Scheuer put out two books about bin Laden and his group, Through Our Enemies' Eyes: Osama bin Laden, Radical Islam and the Future of America (published in 2002, but largely written in 1999 as an unclassified manual for CIA personnel joining the bin Laden unit) and the bestseller Imperial Hubris: Why the West Is Losing the War on Terror, which appeared in 2004 shortly before Scheuer resigned the CIA to go public about his views.

These books were generally trashed by Bu$hCo, since they went against Karl Rove's poltical spin that only Mr Bush can keep America safe, and he's doing a perfect job. It will be interesting to see who's right in this matter. Sadly, we'll see more American dead if Mr Scheuer is right.

It would be wise to read the entire article. Just because Mr Scheuer was trashed, like every other critic of Bu$hCo, does not mean he's wrong.

It's disgraceful that, somehow, by the worst possible luck, several bad apples ended up at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

Down in Australia, where they still have a semblance of a free press, the Sydney Morning Herald has published 15 photos, part of a set of 60 that Bu$hCo doesn't want you to see.

True warporn. S&M for the Keyboard Kommandos who are so insistent that we're bringing freedom, democracy, and American enlightenment to the poor benighted savages.

It's probably a wise idea to copy them now, before Bu$hCo has them wiped off the webpage. Because, in a week, they'll be denying it ever happened.

As there has been so much blather about Me Cheney the “sportsman,” the “hunter,” I thought it would be useful to try to place all of this in some type of format.

Mr Cheney likes guns.

Dick Cheney is a proud gun owner and hunter. In April the Vice President addressed the NRA to wild cheers and acknowledged his own interest in guns.

Well, guns are part of man’s history, and American history as well. Many politicians have hunted in the past, and have avidly campaigned for conservation. Theodore Roosevelt immediately comes to mind in this regard. Sportsman, hunter, conservationist. He hunted for trophies, and while we generally condemn this sort hunting today because it is killing for ego, it did happen and was accepted in the past.

President Roosevelt loved nature, and would go on extended hunting trips to the far western US for weeks at a time, packing in on horses and mules, tramping through forest and over mountains in our majestic west, or through African veldt, camping out at night in tents. This is sports hunting. This is how President Roosevelt realized that open land, in its pristine majestic beauty, must be preserved.

Mr Cheney flies into an airport conveniently close to a private reserve, where birds are cage-raised and let loose specifically to be killed. He travels by truck to a pre-designated spot and the caged birds are transported to the same location and then released. He gets out of the truck and blasts away. Fishermen will recognize this system; it’s like fishing with dynamite.

But a source close to the White House tells NewsMax that Dick Cheney is a true gun aficionado.

Cheney's collection, our sources say, is in the hundreds of guns, including pistols, shotguns and machine guns -- from antique Thompsons to the most modern European automatic machine guns.

To let off some steam (God knows he has some to let off these days),[ed: May, 2004] the Vice President has been known to go out to the federal training center in Maryland where the Secret Service does its own gun practice.

A typical Cheney visit, told to us by a person who attended one, included the Vice President bringing some 30 guns from his own collection.

On the range, Cheney would blow away his targets -- with Thompson machine guns, the latest German and Austrian machine guns, Lugars, MP5s, shot guns, you name it.

This is more than “liking guns.” This is even more than being a “gun nut.” This is a sign of repressed rage and hatred. It’s interesting that the man who was too much of a coward to get himself drafted in time of war has such an affinity to shooting the crap out of paper targets. And he likes the most manly of all weapons, too: the automatic gun. I’ll bet it refreshes him, making him feel like a real he-man again. There’s nothing more exciting than having multiple orgasms with your phallic symbol.

I haven't written about Vice President Cheney and his shooting of a friend, a Republican Big Bucks donor, and this is because so much has been said about it elsewhere.

One thing caught my eye, however. Yesterday it was revealed that Mr Whittington had a heart attack when a shot pellet migrated into the musculature of his heart. Medically, it's called an asymptotic heart attack, and we're told by doctors it isn't quite the same as the form of heart attck most Americans are accustomed to, with yelling, scurrying doctors and nurses, intercoms announcing a "code blue" and a white coated medico grasping paddles and yelling "stand clear!"

The spinmeisters, those well-paid and overworked vital employees of Bu$hCo, have succeeded in changing the framing of the subject. Today the WaPo termed it a "cardiac event."

Just like Hiroshima and Nagasaki were "nuclear events."

Cernig points me to an Oxford Research Group report entitled Iran: Consequences of a War, which I will read tonight since Mrs. F will be in Charlotte until the end of the week (beats surfing for porn). The summary:

An air attack on Iran by Israeli or US forces would be aimed at setting back Iran's nuclear programme by at least five years. A ground offensive by the United States to terminate the regime is not feasible given other commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan, and would not be attempted. An air attack would involve the systematic destruction of research, development, support and training centres for nuclear and missile programmes and the killing of as many technically competent people as possible. A US attack, which would be larger than anything Israel could mount, would also involve comprehensive destruction of Iranian air defence capabilities and attacks designed to pre-empt Iranian retaliation. This would require destruction of Iranian Revolutionary Guard facilities close to Iraq and of regular or irregular naval forces that could disrupt Gulf oil transit routes.

Although US or Israeli attacks would severely damage Iranian nuclear and missile programmes, Iran would have many methods of responding in the months and years that followed. These would include disruption of Gulf oil production and exports, in spite of US attempts at pre-emption, systematic support for insurgents in Iraq, and encouragement to associates in Southern Lebanon to stage attacks on Israel. There would be considerable national unity in Iran in the face of military action by the United States or Israel, including a revitalised Revolutionary Guard.

One key response from Iran would be a determination to reconstruct a nuclear programme and develop it rapidly into a nuclear weapons capability, with this accompanied by withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty. This would require further attacks. A military operation against Iran would not, therefore, be a short-term matter but would set in motion a complex and long-lasting confrontation. It follows that military action should be firmly ruled out and alternative strategies developed. [my em]

Cross-posted at the Brain.

Part 2 of the ePluribus story on the mistreatment of vets returning from the Middle East with PTSD is up at Kos. If you have the time, please stop by, read, and comment.

The entire series is now posted at the ePluribus Media Journal.

#

Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired) writes from Virginia Beach, Virginia. Read his daily commentaries at Pen and Sword.

The NY Times steps off the reservation (again):

We can't think of a president who has gone to the American people more often than George W. Bush has to ask them to forget about things like democracy, judicial process and the balance of powers — and just trust him. We also can't think of a president who has deserved that trust less. This has been a central flaw of Mr. Bush's presidency for a long time. But last week produced a flood of evidence that vividly drove home the point.

Bam! Zoom! - Holy samolies! Honest words in the Times! Have the editors been eating bran flakes again?

DOMESTIC SPYING After 9/11, Mr. Bush authorized the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on the conversations and e-mail of Americans and others in the United States without obtaining a warrant or allowing Congress or the courts to review the operation. Lawmakers from both parties have raised considerable doubt about the legality of this program, but Attorney General Alberto Gonzales made it clear last Monday at a Senate hearing that Mr. Bush hasn't the slightest intention of changing it.

A lot of people have expended a lot of words, thoughts and, yes, rage, over this item, Millions, if not billions, of electrons have been excited throughout the Internets examining the illegal and extra-constitutional actions of a malAdministration that has actively sought to throw off all the restraints a thoughtful group of Founding Fathers built into a document they viewed to be a living thing: the Constitution. Those of us who breathe oxygen are properly alarmed at the perceived intentions of an Executive branch that believes itself to be the supreme arbiter of life in this country, as well as elsewhere on this planet. Mr Bush has no “intention of changing it”?????

Mr Bush needs to be on a leash – a short one. For one thing, the Constitution was established to provide “checks and balances” deliberately so as to prevent any one leg of the tripod of Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches from becoming all-powerful.
There was a good reason for this: the Founders had lived their lives under an absolutist King, and wanted no more of that form of government.

As noted elsewhere, it appears Mr Bush has a “pre-1776” mindset. In point of fact, he actually has a pre-1215 mindset. That was the year when a King John of England was first pulled up short by a group of earls and barons who sought to limit some of the powers claimed by the throne. The Magna Carta also grants unheard of rights to merchants and peasants. It is considered the foundation of English Common Law, and therefore of both American Law and political thought. It imposed a sense of codification to the Common Law and an efficient administration of the laws.

According to Mr. Gonzales, the administration can be relied upon to police itself and hold the line between national security and civil liberties on its own. Set aside the rather huge problem that our democracy doesn't work that way. It's not clear that this administration knows where the line is, much less that it is capable of defending it. Mr. Gonzales's own dedication to the truth is in considerable doubt. In sworn testimony at his confirmation hearing last year, he dismissed as "hypothetical" a question about whether he believed the president had the authority to conduct warrantless surveillance. In fact, Mr. Gonzales knew Mr. Bush was doing just that, and had signed off on it as White House counsel.

Since Mr Gonzalez was under oath at his confirmation, and refused to be sworn in during last week’s political kabuki, you readers can, like me, make your own assessments of his willingness to tell the truth without legal jeopardy at some future date.

THE PRISON CAMPS It has been nearly two years since the Abu Ghraib scandal illuminated the violence, illegal detentions and other abuses at United States military prison camps. There have been Congressional hearings, court rulings imposing normal judicial procedures on the camps, and a law requiring prisoners to be treated humanely. Yet nothing has changed. Mr. Bush also made it clear that he intends to follow the new law on the treatment of prisoners when his internal moral compass tells him it is the right thing to do.

That would be Mr Bush’s [alleged] moral compass.

THE WAR IN IRAQ One of Mr. Bush's biggest "trust me" moments was when he told Americans that the United States had to invade Iraq because it possessed dangerous weapons and posed an immediate threat to America. The White House has blocked a Congressional investigation into whether it exaggerated the intelligence on Iraq, and continues to insist that the decision to invade was based on the consensus of American intelligence agencies.

Bush lied. Thousands Died. Anyone care to trust him again?

DUGWAY BIOLOGICAL WARFARE CENTER

9 nabbed inside top-secret Dugway The process for vetting workers at one of the most sensitive military sites in the country comes down to trust of contractors, subcontractors and "subcontractors of subcontractors," federal officials said Friday, a day after nine undocumented immigrants were arrested at Dugway Proving Ground. Contractors employing foreign nationals at the base are supposed to identify those individuals for additional background checks. But the discovery that nine undocumented workers were able to enter and move freely about parts of a base dedicated to research into biological and chemical weapons defenses revealed a troubling flaw to that system. If a contractor fails to identify workers as foreigners, Dugway spokeswoman Paula Nicholson said, no check is conducted. "I'm sure we are going to look at things, to investigate what to do to make sure this doesn't happen again," Nicholson said. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agent Adam Parks called the issue "troubling." "Just by saying you're working for a subcontractor, you can access one of the most highly top secret installations in the country, dealing with weapons of mass destruction," Parks said. "Once inside the perimeter, they had their identification and would go to work, not monitored. They didn't have an escort or anything like that."

AIRPORTS

"Operation Tarmac" is an ongoing Immigration and Customs Enforcement initiative that targets employers and unauthorized workers who have access to sensitive areas at commercial airports in the United States. Agents have identified over 5,800 unauthorized airport workers, arrested more than 1,100 unauthorized immigrant workers at airports, and obtained 775 criminal indictments. Among the cases: l March 25, 2005 - Agents arrested 14 illegal immigrants working at Logan International Airport in Boston. All the workers were employed by a contract company that provided services for Logan Airport. The workers had badges that allowed them access beyond where passengers are screened. The investigation is ongoing. l March 8, 2005 - Agents arrested 27 illegals working as aircraft mechanics and in other aircraft maintenance jobs at the Piedmont/Triad International Airport in Greensboro, N.C. At least two of the workers had FAA mechanic's licenses to work on aircraft. Twelve individuals have been indicted in this case on a range of criminal charges, including knowingly hiring illegals.

NUCLEAR PLANTS & RELATED INDUSTRIES

"Operation Glow Worm" is a joint operation by Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to screen the workforce at the nation's 104 nuclear power plants. Numerous unauthorized workers have been arrested and warning notices have been issued to those employing unauthorized workers. Among the cases: l Sept. 15, 2005 - Agents arrested three illegal workers when they attempted to enter the outer secure area of the Omaha Public Power District's Fort Calhoun Nuclear Station to perform contract work at the plant. The three men, all citizens of Mexico, had been hired by an independent contractor to perform maintenance work at the nuclear facility. l March 2005 - Agents arrested six illegal immigrants performing maintenance at the Crystal River Nuclear Power Plant in Citrus, Fla. All were employees of a Texas-based specialty contract company. At least one was later indicted on criminal charges. l March 18, 2005 - Agents arrested an undocumented worker who performed contract pipe insulation work at the Duane Arnold Energy Center Nuclear Power Plant in Palo, Iowa. He was later indicted for using and possessing fraudulent documents and making false statements to federal agents.

CHEMICAL PLANTS

l May 20, 2005 - Agents arrested 60 illegals who performed contract work at 12 sensitive facilities, including seven petrochemical refineries and two power plants, located in California, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. The workers were employed by a company that provides workers to the petrochemical industry, the nuclear industry and other energy sectors.
l Jan. 14, 2005 - Agents arrested 17 at the Shell chemical refinery at the Port of Mobile, Ala., as part of an ongoing probe into petroleum industry subcontractors. All the workers were employed by a subcontractor. One had an outstanding criminal arrest warrant.

DEFENSE FACILITIES

l Oct. 5, 2005 - Two illegals (from Indonesia and Senegal) who served as language instructors at the U.S. Army Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, N.C., were arrested and criminally charged with using false documents to gain employment and making false statements. A third was charged with being in the country illegally. Among their clients: U.S. Special Forces.

l Oct. 4, 2005 - Seven illegals were arrested at the U.S. Air Force Base in Mountain Home, Idaho. The men - six from Mexico and one from Canada - were working for Nutek Construction, which was sub-contracted to build housing on the secure air base.

l Aug. 26, 2005 - Agents arrested six Mexican nationals at the Fort Irwin U.S. Army base east of Barstow, Calif. The men were working illegally for Laurence-Hovenier, Inc., a construction company building military housing at the base. The workers, most of whom had security badges authorizing them to enter the base, were identified after agents audited the hiring records of more than 700 Laurence-Hovenier workers. The audit found that more than 40 percent of the employees on the company's payroll might not have been authorized to work in the U.S.

l July 26, 2005 - Agents arrested six working at the Homestead Air Reserve Base in Homestead, Fla. The men, who were contracted by a Texas-based corporation, were working on a major runway-resurfacing project. Officers working at the Air Reserve's main gate noticed irregularities in the documents presented by the three men and called Immigration and Customs Enforcement for follow-up.

SEAPORTS

l Oct. 5, 2005 - Agents arrested seven Mexican nationals working illegally at a Pacific American Service (PACAM) warehouse and distribution center for goods brought into the United States through the Port of Oakland. PACAM'S bonded facilities are located in northern California, close to the San Francisco and Oakland ports, railyards and international airports.

We're going to lose another city, or a large part of one, sometime this year before the mid-term elections. And we're going to be told it was because the "Libruls" wouldn't let Mr Bush wiretap every American at will.

I think it's a good idea to get into the public record right now that the Republicans have been in charge of "National Security" for over 5 years now, and we've lost about 5,000 Americans here in the US, between their incredibly negligent failures of 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina.

They OWN the term "National Security." It's theirs - they trademarked it as an authentic, core Republican value, right up there with the concepts that gays are the new n-words, all Muslims are evil, and Israel must be defended to the last American.

As Progrssive, patriotic Americans it is incumbent on us to be sure this can is tightly tied to the elephant's tail when catastrophe strikes a third Blue city.

Thanks to Raw Story for the lead.

According to Robert Novak, one of the patriotic members of the administration controlled press who helped reveal Valerie Plame's undercover identity as an arms proliferation agent with the CIA, has now revealed the White House's latest strategy for selling its woebegone war in Iraq.

…the Bush administration is going directly to the public with its war message. Raul Damas, associate director of political affairs at the White House, has been on the phone directly to Republican county chairmen to arrange local speeches by active duty military personnel to talk about their experiences in Iraq.

This flies in the face of a Department of Defense directive issued in August of 2004 by then Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz.

"Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces on Active Duty" limits military members on active duty from engaging in certain political activities. Among other things, a member may not:

-- Use his or her official authority or influence for interfering with an election; affecting the course or outcome of an election; soliciting votes for a particular candidate or issue; or requiring or soliciting political contributions from others.

-- Participate in partisan political management, campaigns, or conventions (unless attending a convention as a spectator when not in uniform).

-- Make campaign contributions to another member of the Armed Forces or an employee of the Federal Government.

The Wolfowitz memorandum also sets restrictive conditions on military members' ability to run for public office.

Now it appears that military members, legally bound to follow the orders of Mr. Bush, are being encouraged to participate in political activities that support the agendas of their commander in chief.

To steal a line from L. Frank Baum, I don't think we're in Kansas anymore.

#

Commander Jeff Huber, U.S. Navy (Retired) writes from Virginia Beach, Virginia. Read his daily commentaries at Pen and Sword.

Gordon (the other funny, angry vet over at “Alternate Brain”) wrote about the Tom Toles cartoon that got the VRWNM in an uproar, and caused the Joint Chiefs of Staff to once again dishonor their uniforms by political pandering.

The other cartoonist, Tom Tomorrow, has a blog and enabled comments a while back in an experiment. Let me state right up front: Liberal blogs have comments because we want intercourse with our readers. No! Not that kind! I mean the back-and-forth of ideas and thoughts, because it’s always better to let in air and light. Fascist Party blogs usually don’t have comments because they really don’t give a crud what you think. If you read their blogs, your job is not to reply, because that implies you’ve got a brain. Mmm-kay?

So, Tom Tomorrow had a really inspiring comment that he promoted to a main thread today and it caused me to choke up for a moment, and then smile in pride.

SP4 Tomas V. Young (Ret) Says: As a veteran of the war in Iraq who knows a thing or two about “traumatic and life-altering injuries” although not to the point of the soldier depicted in the cartoon (I was lucky enough to only be paralyzed from the chest down.) I can safely say that the cartoon was far less offensive than the unfortunate accidents I have when the external catheter I wear for when the bladder I can no longer control decides to “function” or the hours of frustration I get when I try to make love to my wife and none of the options presented to us have worked. And it certainly is not as offensive as hearing the pro war/anti-cartoon crowd say that I shouldn’t “whine” about my situation because I volunteered and that sounds to me like they are saying that I got what I deserved. So take what they say with a very large grain of salt, they have no idea about how veterans with traumatic injuries feel, because if they did they would do best to use this cartoon in their new laugh therapy program.

There was a more complete email following up this comment:

In an email, reprinted here with permission, the author elaborates:

I want to start off by saying that I am not whining. I am merely talking about all the things I deal with everyday. I know that I volunteered and I have to live with that. But I want you to know that I volunteered to go to where the all evidence told me to go which was pretty much every other middle eastern country that wasn’t Iraq (that’s the conservative disclaimer.) And I still support armed action against those countries, although not as much now as it’s safe to say our armed action has been spread wafer thin (that one’s for the liberals.) But this business with the cartoon needed the opinion of a so-called “traumatically life-altering” injuries, although thankfully not as seriously as the strip portrayed. Being a paralyzed veteran of a war that our own president has admitted was started on false terms I have alot to be upset about. Not only do I have to deal with the injury itself and the physical limitations that come with it but I get a cool sidekick called PTSD that leaves me jumpy, unreasonably angry at times, and equally unreasonably depressed and on top of that I get to have great memories of what it was like to walk but the equally great memories of the friends I had that did not make it back from the land of sand (I know it may be hard to read in print but those are sarcastically “great” memories.) I go through things that constantly make me feel shitty and I look for every little bit of humor I can squeeze out of a life that now offers little. Saying this I laughed my ass off at the caroon an in fact it is the background for my desktop. I am more offended at the fact that I received these injuries in a unarmored open air truck and although I can’t speak for anyone else I’d be willing to bet I’m not the only “traumatically life altered” veteran who thinks so.

Tomas specifically asked me to include his email address, which is Tomasyoung8@aol.com, and to mention that he’ll be on 60 Minutes this coming Sunday. There’s a long interview with him here.

Tom Young is our brother. I admire his guts. He needs our moral support and our thanks. Write him. Tell him you think he has a pair that clank.

Earlier today I discussed one of Mr Bush's latest lies - his attempt today to terrify Californians in general and Angelenos in particular, while simultaneously performing a double back flip two and a half gainer by publicly revealing some of our national security organs' sources and methods. He went into enough detail regarding the who's and the how's of the plot to surely alert al Quaida that we're on to them. All the good puppy press obediently ate the dainty morsels from his hand and then rolled over on their backs, tails wagging expectantly, waiting for the obligatory "Good dog!" and accompanying tummy scratch.

Was it only two days ago we were solemnly assured by the Inquisitor General, little Abu Gonzalez himself, that al Quaida reads our newspapers and disclosing details about our super duper double secret magic password domestic spying program that keeps an eagle ear on Democratic politicians, journalists, progressive bloggers, and dissenters can't be made public because Bu$hCo is pretending it's all about "terrorism" and those dastardly terrorists forget we're listening in to them if they don't read it in the papers? I think it was.

Why does the Kim Jung Il of Crawford hate America? Why is he reminding al Quaida that we're keeping an eye ear on them? If he hadn't had to brag about that 2002 plot we might have learned something useful.

But California has 54 electoral votes, and Mr Bush got a shellacking out there in the last election and so they must be driven into the Fascist Party pen with the ole Crawford Texas cattle prod. Plus, let's not forget that Ahnuld is sinking almost as fast as Mr Bush in the public's estimation.

Here's a public thanks to Steve over at "No More Mister Nice Blog" for reminding me that the great Library Tower atrocity wouldn't have worked anyway.

Does the name Richard Reed strike a chord? That's the British citizen who was apprehended on December 22, 2001 while trying to blow a hole in an airliner fuselage by lighting up one of his shoes. Ever since then, December 24, 2001 to be exact, people have been shucking shoes and having their Dr Scholl's pads examined by the TSA.

There would have been no shoe bombs to blow up reinforced steel cockpit doors (while miraculously not putting a new 6 foot by 6 foot porthole in the fuselage) and also leaving the cockpit controls in working condition so as to be able to aim the plane at the building.

They guy's getting sloppy in his desperation. Usually their lies are more coherent.

There’s an old slogan I learned many years ago.

“Proper Planning Prevents Piss-Poor Performance”

It’s called the “Law of Six P’s” and it’s a serious, vital issue in any circumstances in which people can be damaged in some way. It might not matter much when you’re playing bridge with Uncle James and Aunt Mae, but it’s as serious as rent when death climbs aboard.

Holden’s got a charmer of an article:

Last four years we've had what we call the President's Management Agenda. Employees have been working to help ensure that the programs are doing what we expect them to do. That's what they do. They spend a lot of time on this. We ask federal managers to achieve good results at reasonable costs, and we measure them. The point is, is that if they can't prove they're achieving good results, then the programs, in my judgment, ought to be eliminated and/or trimmed back. That's why I told you earlier, we found 141 such programs. And we did the same thing in last year's budget, as well.

One of the interesting innovations that we have put forth is a new website, called expectmore.gov. It's a program where -- it's a website where we start to put the measurement results up for everybody to see. Nothing like transparency into the federal bureaucracy to determine whether or not a program is working. And so I think you'll find it innovative -- I do -- that the White House has put this website up. And you'll be able to see whether or not results are being achieved for the money spent.

So this morning I paid a visit to expectmore.gov and clicked on their link to programs that are not performing. What did I find? Listed among those programs judged to be performing poorly was Department of State's Public Diplomacy program headed by none other than Karen Hughes. Let's fire her ass!

Also listed as "Not Performing" are:

Dept of Homeland Security Border Patrol

Dept of Homeland Security Coast Guard: Aids to Navigation

Dept of Homeland Security Coast Guard: Drug Interdiction

Dept of Homeland Security Coast Guard: Polar Icebreaking Program

Dept of Homeland Security Coast Guard: Search and Rescue

Dept of Homeland Security Immigration and Customs Enforcement: Automation Modernization Program

Dept of Homeland Security Preparedness -- Grants and Training Office Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program

Dept of Homeland Security Preparedness -- Grants and Training Office State Homeland Security Grants Dept of Homeland Security Preparedness -- Infrastructure Protection Cyber Security

Dept of Homeland Security Science and Technology: Threat and Vulnerability, Testing and Assessment

Dept of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration: Air Cargo Security Programs

Dept of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration: Aviation Regulation and Enforcement

Dept of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration: Baggage Screening Technology

Dept of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration: Federal Air Marshal Service

Dept of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration: Flight Crew Training

Dept of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration: Passenger Screening Technology

Dept of Homeland Security Transportation Security Administration: Screener Workforce

----
Corps of Engineers-Civil Works Coastal Storm Damage Reduction

Corps of Engineers-Civil Works Flood Damage Reduction

----
Federal Election Commission Federal Election Laws - Compliance and Enforcement

----
Office of Natl Drug Control Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign

----
Securities & Exchange Comm Enforcement

Securities & Exchange Comm Full Disclosure Program (Corporate Review)
Are we surprised?

I understand Mr Bush gave a speech today, telling everyone to (once again) be very, very very very afraid because the terrorists are out to kill us all because they hate our freedoms.

Speaking at the National Guard Memorial Building in Los Angeles, Mr Bush told the nation that waaaaay back in 2002 an attempt was to be made to destroy the Library Tower in Los Angeles. The details of the plot included shoe bombs to blow open the locked, reinforced cockpit doors so the dastardly terrorists could take control of the aircraft and plunge it into the building in a horrifying repeat of the September 11, 2001 attacks that not only killed over 3,000 Americans, but also catapulted Mr Bush’s approval ratings into the 85%+ stratosphere.

Mr Bush said that Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the alleged mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks (and who was captured in 2003,) had already begun planning the West Coast operation in October, just after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. One of Mohammed's key planners was Hambali, the alleged operations chief of the al-Qaida related terrorist group Jemaah Islamiyah. Instead of recruiting Arab hijackers, Hambali found Southeast Asian men who would be less likely to arouse suspicion and who were sent to meet with Osama bin Laden.

The president said the plot was derailed when a Southeast Asian nation arrested a key al-Qaida operative. Bush did not name the country or the operative.

Frances Fragos Townsend, assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, said Mohammed, working with Hambali in Asia, recruited four members of the terrorist cell. She told reporters in a conference call that all four went to Afghanistan, where they met bin Laden and swore their loyalty

Mr Bush has been on the defensive for a while now, since details of the illegal and extra-constitutional domestic wiretapping plot have been made public. It seems that Bu$hCo has been wiretapping American citizens inside the US, and lying about it, by claiming they’re only listening in to people who have phone conversations with al Quaida operatives overseas.

In another attempt to bolster his rapidly sagging approval ratings, Mr Bush mentioned the words “terror”, “terrorists” and “terrorism” 97 times. This is a new record for fear-mongering for Bu$hCo. Telephoned inquiries to Guinness Book of World Records about listing this achievement were not returned.

In a now-familiar Bu$hCo tactic, Mr Bush revealed details of an alleged counter-intelligence operation, revealing information that could quite easily compromise sources and methods used to collect information about terrorist plans, recruiting methods and activities.

Call me cynical, but it appears as if Bu$hCo’s political security is more important than national security.

Thanks to Jeff Lewis and Paul Kerr at Arms Control Wonk for bringing us yet another lie from the most dysfunctional malAdministration in the history of the US:

Four years ago, U.N. inspectors concluded that Iraq had failed to .. account for large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, weapons capable of killing millions. In last month’s declaration, Iraq again failed to account for those weapons.

The Iraqi dictator did not even attempt to submit a credible declaration. We can now be certain that he holds the United Nations and the U.N. Security Council and its resolutions in contempt.

President George W. Bush, Fort Hood, Texas, January 3, 2003

U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them—despite Iraq’s recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He’s given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

President George W. Bush, State of the Union Address, January 28, 2003

Apparently the word "declaration" is very elastic, and changes depending on circumstances.

Our ePluribus Media article on veterans suffering from PTSD is