India Will Try To Push Bush Around

An Assertive India Girds for Negotiations With Bush

NEW DELHI, Feb. 27 — When President Bush lands in India early Wednesday, he will encounter an ever ambivalent American ally with one important difference from the past: this India has new power to assert its views, some of which align with Mr. Bush's agenda and some of which do not.

Much has changed, in fact, since the last visit here by an American president, in 2000, when President Clinton's address to the Indian Parliament was received so enthusiastically that lawmakers climbed over benches to shake his hand.

What's not to like... An America that is shipping more jobs overseas--especially to India--than any other industrialized country in the world.

But in the past six years, India has also become a more confident partner — in trade and in America's campaigns against terrorism and nuclear proliferation — which touch India both obliquely and directly as it looks abroad in pursuit of its own interests like never before. Meanwhile, India's endemic prickliness shows no signs of remission.

Pratap Bhanu Mehta, president of the nonpartisan Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, sees in his country what he calls "a great admiration for U.S. power," a capacity that many Indians find worthy of emulation. "This is a power that acts independently, acts freely, is not constrained," he said. "It's not so much an anti-American view than wanting to replicate that."

That fine balance is most visible in talks over whether to reward India with access to American nuclear technology, an issue about which both sides would like to announce a deal this week. They are not there yet, as the talks rub up against the one thing that many Indians, particularly in the political elite, hold dear: the idea of India's independence.

This is a mistake in the process... And just exactly how is China, Pakistan and Iran going to feel about the idea that India is grwoing nuclear capabilities and allying itself with the US?

Little else may actually unite opinion here. Indeed, the many shades of political opinion found in this feisty country of one billion defy any easy rendering — of an India as either for or against the United States. India has fundamentalists of the Hindu and Muslim persuasion, Maoist guerrillas, free marketers, newly minted millionaires and Marxist lawmakers with posters of Che Guevara on their office walls.

The Pew Global Attitudes Project found Indians last year to be among the most cheerful in their appraisal of both the United States and President Bush. In a survey published this week in the Indian newsweekly Outlook, two-thirds of Indians "strongly" or "somewhat" regarded Mr. Bush as "a friend of India," even as 72 percent called the United States "a bully."

It's okay to be an international bully as long as you give us your technology and jobs.

Specter Proposing An End-Run Around The Constitution

Deal On Spy Program In Works: Bill Would Let Court Approve Wiretaps

WASHINGTON -- Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, a leading Republican critic of President Bush's domestic spying program, has drafted a bill that would exempt the once-secret surveillance program from a 1978 statute that requires warrants.

The draft bill, which will be aired today at a Judiciary Committee hearing, would require Bush to submit the classified details of the spying program to a special national security court for review. The court would decide whether the program violates the constitutional prohibitions on unreasonable searches.

The Pennsylvania lawmaker has not yet released his bill to the public, but the Globe obtained a draft copy that has been circulating among legal specialists who are set to testify about the spying program at today's hearing.

Specter's proposal appears to offer a face-saving solution to both sides, some specialists said. It avoids declaring whether the program until now has been illegal, but reasserts congressional authority over domestic surveillance going forward.

It may be a face-saving solution for the Bush administration and the congress critters, but it screws us out of the Fourth Amendment protections to further an agenda and program(s) that are fruitless, arbitrary, capricious and STUPID! Given that the federal bench is stacked with the likes of Scalia, Stevens, Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Borkites, there isn't one iota of possibility that fairness and constitutionality will remain intact. What Specter now proposes is asinine and a sell-out measure that screws the general public.

'This is a good-faith effort on the part of Senator Specter to reach a reasonable compromise,' said Pepperdine University law professor Douglas Kmiec, a former Reagan administration lawyer who will testify today. 'We could endlessly debate who is right under the existing law. . . . The wisdom of Specter's approach is to say 'OK, this is an interesting debate, but we've got a real problem to solve and here is my attempt at solving the problem.'

Only a committed Reaganite could see the benefit of screwing the Constitution in this manner... Perhaps Professor Kmiec should be committed to Gitmo for about six months and force-fed to see how long he would remain committed to the ultra-conservative ideology he has obviously endorsed.

But Specter's proposal drew fire from critics of the president's assertion that his wartime powers allow him to circumvent the 1978 law and spy on Americans without a warrant. The critics said Specter is proposing changing the law to accommodate Bush without making it clear that a president must obey the law.

Harold Koh, the dean of Yale Law School and another specialist who will testify today, said Specter's bill would 'make matters far worse by giving the Congress's blanket preauthorization to a large number of unreasonable searches and seizures,' without offering a full review of a program that until now he contended has been 'blatantly illegal.'

'To enact the draft legislation . . . would provide neither the congressional oversight nor the judicial review that this program needs to restore our confidence in our constitutional checks and balances,' Koh said.

Bravo! We hear from someone that has actually read the Constitution and understands that the social contract reserves rights to "We the people..."

The debate over changing the wiretapping law comes as 18 Democrats in the House of Representatives sent Bush a letter yesterday demanding that he appoint a special counsel empowered to independently investigate whether the program is illegal.

Scott McClellan, the White House press secretary, dismissed the request in his daily briefing yesterday, saying there is ''no basis" for a special counsel, repeating the administration's assertion that the program is legal.

Dismiss, distract, deny, spin, humiliate and lie... Standard approaches for this admiinistration.

In a phone interview, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino declined to comment on the details of Specter's bill. But she said the administration is committed to working with Congress on legislation 'that will further codify the president's authority but not undermine the program's capabilities.'

Dismiss, distract, deny, spin, humiliate and lie... Standard approaches for this admiinistration.

Specter's bill would require a special national security court to review the program. If the court finds that the program, as a whole, is gathering important information and does not violate the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches, the court can approve its use for 45-day increments.

We already have a court and a law that should have been followed... It's called FISA... Let us not create yet another law with conflicting parameters and permutations that allows AG Gonzalez more wiggle room to justify illegal actions. And let us remember that we cannot pass ex post facto laws.

The bill would create a bypass around the 1978 wiretapping law -- especially the mandate that the government must show a judge evidence to justify its decision to eavesdrop on each person it monitors.

But this new law should not bypass an impeachment proceeding against the Bush Gang for violating existing law. Facism is alive and well in the United States of America... and today it is embodied in the US Senate under the direction of Arlen Specter.

Trapped: When Acting Ethically Is Against the Law

As part of its Constitutional Series the CATO Institute is offering a book on the ethics in an environment where blowing the whistle is increasingly becoming a punishable event in the corporate world as well as by law:

Trapped: When Acting Ethically is Against the Law

Since Enron's collapse in 2002, the federal government has stepped up its campaign against white-collar crime. In doing so, contemporary federal criminal law has created a "Catch-22," in which businesspeople are foced to act either unethically or illegally.

Cato Institute senior fellow and Georgetown University business professor John Hasnas examines the ethical dilemmas raised by over-criminalization. "Because there is an increasing divergence between the demands of the law and the demands of ethics," Hasnas explains, "current federal criminal law incentivizes and in some cases mandates unethical behavior by businesspeople."

In creating white-collar criminal law, the federal government has eviscerated the liberal safeguards of the traditional criminal law to permit conviction for merely negligent or innocent actions and to circumvent the presumption of innocence, the 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, and the attorney-client privilege.

Thus, federal criminal law creates serious problems for businesses that wish to respect their employees. According to Hasnas: "It gives corporations strong incentives to invade employees' privacy, deny them the presumption of innocence, and breach promises of confidentiality."

Hasnas concludes that the solution to the problem of white collar crime does not rest with more vigorous federal enforcement efforts: "With regard to the offenses that can adequately be handled by civil liability, the proper solution may be absaining from any efforts at criminal enforcement at all."

Having taught courses on applied ethics in the fields of Business, Medicine & Biotechnology, Society, Education, and the Military, this would be a text that would offer insight on the ethical bind that causes an individual to hide behind career and conformity to social pressures, or pursue a course of action that will stain their professional reputation, adversely affect their career choices, and blast them into the limelight of public scrutiny. It also examines the changing legal environment that puts compliance with laws that may serve to keep improper or illegal actions of corporations or governments secret and hidden from the eyes of the general public.

In the current environment of an overly secret, dysfunctional business and governmental environment, this is an area of great concern for anyone studying--and trying to apply--ethics. At only $12.95 plus shipping, it will be worth checking out... I am thinking about sending copies to George W. Bush (if he can read), Donald Rumsfeld, Alberto Gonzalez, Dick Cheney, Condaleeza Rice, David McCourt, Dennis Hastert, William Frist, Jack Walch, Steve Forbes, Tom DeLay, Randall Cunningham, and the CEOs of the top 10 corporations in the Forbes 100.

Edward Copeland's Institute of Lower Learning - 02-28-06

Tuesday's News From The Institute Of Lower Learning

"Network" is one of my favorite films of all time, a movie that grows more prophetic with each passing year and one that often springs to my mind. Today, with some new plummeting poll numbers for Dubya and Cheney that shock even me -- someone who can't understand how there can be anyone left outside their immediate families who still approve of their performances -- Beale's great rant is worth re-reading.

Now the index:

Falling, falling, falling: Dubya and Cheney's approval numbers on overall performance and specific issues hit record laws in a new poll.

The toll of sectarian violence: The figures are three times as high as originally reported.

Earmark legislation: The Senate Rules Committee nears a bill to crack down on the practice.

The revolving door: Sen. John Thune is now taking care of the legislation himself for the clients he used to represent as a lobbyist.

Spying shortfalls: The proposed reorganization of the country's intelligence
operations, like everything the Bush Administration touches, is an incompetent mess.
Suing for documents: The New York Times seeks papers on the NSA program.

Et tu, Jeb?: It should have occurred to me yesterday, but when all 50 governors criticized the treatment of the National Guard, their signatures included that of
Dubya's younger brother. Dubya and Rummy try to mend fences.

To prove his point: Dubya's future budget plans involve devastating cuts to veterans' health care benefits.

Bolton's battle: The U.N. ambassador leads the administration's fight against a new human rights panel.

Darfur violence spreads: The gunmen terrorizing the region of Sudan are now crossing into Chad and causing chaos there.

Faith and politics: A group of Catholic House Democrats plan to release a document explaining the balance between private faith and public service.

Utah evolves: A proposal to ban evolution from schools is defeated in the Republican-controlled Utah House.

Another side of Jack: The editor of The Washingtonian discusses the Abramoff he knows.

Enron trial: The company's former top accountant testifies about orders to take illegally from the company's reserves.

Stories We Missed Because So Much Was Happening

While we have been busy blogging away on national security, the DPW deal, and the antics of the Bushies, a number of other stories have been all but ignored. This post is an attempt to catch us up.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Iraq's Death Squads: On The Brink Of Civil War

Most of the corpses in Baghdad's mortuary show signs of torture and execution. And the Interior Ministry is being blamed. Hundreds of Iraqis are being tortured to death or summarily executed every month in Baghdad alone by death squads working from the Ministry of the Interior, the United Nations' outgoing human rights chief in Iraq has revealed.

John Pace, who left Baghdad two weeks ago, told The Independent on Sunday that up to three-quarters of the corpses stacked in the city's mortuary show evidence of gunshot wounds to the head or injuries caused by drill-bits or burning cigarettes. Much of the killing, he said, was carried out by Shia Muslim groups under the control of the Ministry of the Interior.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Booming India Finds That America Wants To Be Its New Best Friend

This week Bush visits the next Asian superpower, a honeypot for US firms, a democracy - and a rival to China. Amelia Gentleman reports from Delhi

It takes a while to identify anything Indian inside the Metropolitan Mall in the rich Delhi suburb of Gurgaon. Harrison Ford peers from the cinema posters; Tommy Hilfiger lines up alongside Reebok and Benetton on the shop floor. Only how a cleaner balances flattened cardboard boxes on his head, and the prominent sign at the escalator ('Be careful of your sari while riding the stairs') hint this is not a shopping centre in Alabama.
American tastes colonise the food hall. Tex Mex jostles with hot dog stalls and ice cream parlours selling Smoothies. At Pizza Hut, teenagers buy Indianised versions of the global brand - Spicy Korma and Tikka Chicken pizzas, sprinkled heavily with green chillies.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If Congress Doesn't Start Policing Itself More Seriously, Federal Prosecutors Might Step In

The Justice Department has a message for Congress: clean up your house or else we may have to do it for you. A senior federal law enforcement official told TIME that the paralyzed and often lax House ethics committee has created a vacuum that prosecutors won't hesitate to fill. The House’s internal mechanism for keeping corruption in check is "broken," says the official.

By contrast, current criminal probes of lawmakers are expanding rapidly. Like the Abramoff probe, the investigation into former Republican Representative Randy “Duke” Cunningham from San Diego is also widening. Last week, defense contractor Mitchell Wade of MZM, Inc., pleaded guilty to supplying more than $1 million of the $2.4 million in bribes Cunningham previously admitted taking in a scheme that touches Defense Department officials and two other members of Congress. A Defense Department spokesman tells TIME that "there is an ongoing review by appropriate organizations within the Department" as to whether the Cunningham- and MZM-linked intelligence contracts would have compromised any Pentagon intelligence programs.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Data Mining Program Continues After Lawmakers Order It Closed

A controversial intelligence data mining program, which was closed by lawmakers over privacy concerns two years ago, has continued to receive funding and remained in operation under different code names in different agencies, according to today's National Journal.

National Journal Excerpt: Research under the Defense Department's Total Information Awareness program -- which developed technologies to predict terrorist attacks by mining government databases and the personal records of people in the United States -- was moved from the Pentagon's research-and-development agency to another group, which builds technologies primarily for the National Security Agency, according to documents obtained by National Journal and to intelligence sources familiar with the move. The names of key projects were changed, apparently to conceal their identities, but their funding remained intact, often under the same contracts.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Restoring the Public Trust By Bill Moyers

I will leave to Jon Stewart the rich threads of humor to pluck from the hunting incident in Texas. All of us are relieved that the Vice President’s friend has survived. I can accept Dick Cheney’s word that the accident was one of the worst moments of his life. What intrigues me as a journalist now is the rare glimpse we have serendipitously been offered into the tightly knit world of the elites who govern today.

The Vice President was hunting on a 50-thousand acre ranch owned by a lobbyist friend who is the heiress to a family fortune of land, cattle, banking and oil (ah, yes, the quickest and surest way to the American dream remains to choose your parents well.)....

Two years ago, in a report entitled Democracy in an Age of Rising Inequality, the American Political Science Association concluded that progress toward realizing American ideals of democracy “may have stalled, and even, in some areas, reversed.” Privileged Americans “roar with a clarity and consistency that public officials readily hear and routinely follow” while citizens “with lower or moderate incomes are speaking with a whisper.”

The following year, on the eve of President George W. Bush’s second inauguration, the editors of The Economist, reporting on inequality in America, concluded that the United States “risks calcifying into a European-style, class-based society.”

As great wealth has accumulated at the top, the rest of society has not been benefiting proportionally. In 1960 the gap between the top 20% and the bottom 20% was thirtyfold. Now it is seventy-five fold. Thirty years ago the average annual compensation of the top 100 chief executives in the country was 30 times the pay of the average worker. Today it is 1000 times the pay of the average worker. A recent article in The Financial Times reports on a study by the American economist Robert J. Gordon, who finds “little long-term change in workers’ share of U.S. income over the past half century.” Middle-ranking Americans are being squeezed, he says, because the top ten percent of earners have captured almost half the total income gains in the past four decades and the top one percent have gained the most of all – “more in fact, than all the bottom 50 percent.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Whatever Already! Comments On "Authorized" Leaks

Did the Bush administration “authorize” the leak of classified information to Bob Woodward? And did those leaks damage national security?

The vice-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) made exactly that charge tonight in a letter to John Negroponte, the Director of National Intelligence. What prompted Rockefeller to write Negroponte was a recent op-ed in the New York Times by CIA director Porter Goss complaining that leaks of classified information were the fault of “misguided whistleblowers.”

Rockefeller charged in his letter that the most “damaging revelations of intelligence sources and methods are generated primarily by Executive Branch officials pushing a particular policy, and not by the rank-and-file employees of intelligence agencies.”

Later in the same letter, Rockefeller said: “Given the Administration’s continuing abuse of intelligence information for political purposes, its criticism of leaks is extraordinarily hypocritical. Preventing damage to intelligence sources and methods from media leaks will not be possible until the highest level of the Administration cease to disclose classified information on a selective basis for political purposes.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Ted Koppel: Iraq For U.S. Is 'About The Oil'

NEW YORK In a surprisingly strong Op Ed on Friday, Ted Koppel, the former "NIghtline" host who is now an occasional columnist for The New York Times, argues that when it comes right down to it, the U.S. adventure in Iraq is, as some charge, "about the oil."

He likened the situation to H.L. Mencken's statement that when someone says something is "not about the money" it is indeed "about the money." The same is true in this case relating to oil.

While it's wrong to say that we invaded the country to take over its oil supply, Koppel writes in the Times, "the construction of American military bases inside Iraq, bases that can be maintained long after the bulk of our military forces are ultimately withdrawn, will serve to replace the bases that the United States has lost in Saudi Arabia. There may be other national security reasons that the United States cannot now precipitously withdraw its forces from Iraq, including the danger that the country would become a regional terrorist base; but none is greater than forestalling the ensuing power vacuum and regional instability, and the impact this would have on oil production....

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Santorum Charity Low On Giving, Up On Fees

WASHINGTON - Sen. Rick Santorum (news, bio, voting record)'s charity donated about 40 percent of the $1.25 million it spent during a four-year period, well below Better Business Bureau standards — paying out the rest for overhead, including several hundred thousand dollars to campaign aides on the charity payroll.

The charity, Operation Good Neighbor, is described on its Web site as an organization promoting "compassionate conservatism" by providing grants to small nonprofit groups, many of them religious.

The Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance says charitable organizations should spend at least 65 percent of their total expenses on program activities.

Operation Good Neighbor is based at the same address as Pennsylvania Sen. Santorum's campaign office in suburban Philadelphia, and some of the same people who have worked on his campaign are working for his charity and collecting money from it, records show.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
United Arab Emirates Donated At Least $1M To Bush Library

HOUSTON -- A sheik from the United Arab Emirates contributed at least $1 million to the Bush Library Foundation, which established the George Bush Presidential Library at Texas A&M University in College Station.

The UAE owns Dubai Ports World, which is taking operations from London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation Co., which operates six U.S. ports.

A political uproar has ensued over the deal, which the White House approved without congressional oversight. Dubai Ports World offered Thursday night to delay part of the takeover to give the Bush administration more time to convince lawmakers the deal poses no security risks.

The donations were made in the early 1990s for the library, which houses the papers of former President George Bush, the current president's father.

The list of donors names Sheik Zayed Bin Sultan al Nahyan and the people of the United Arab Emirates as one donor in the $1 million or more category.

The amount of the gift grants them recognition on the engraved donor wall in the library entrance or on the paving bricks that line the library's walkways, according to library documents.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Reports Tied UAE To Bin Laden & Cole Bombing

As its ties to the U.S. war on terror are brought into the spotlight, more details about the ties between The United Arab Emirates and U.S. enemies abroad are being unearthed.

The AP recently reported that the Sept. 11 Commission report states U.S. intelligence believed that Osama bin Laden had visited an Afghan desert in 1999 near a hunting camp used by UAE officials.

According to the AP, commission sources claimed that:

"Bin Laden regularly went from his adjacent camp to the larger camp where he visited the Emiratis ... National technical intelligence confirmed the location and description of the larger camp and showed the nearby presence of an official aircraft of the United Arab Emirates."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bush Family Ties To The UAE: Lou Dobbs Took A Look At The Family Ties Between The Two

DOBBS: President Bush's family and members of the Bush administration have long-standing business connections with the United Arab Emirates, and those connections are raising new concerns and questions tonight in some quarters about why the president is defying his very own party leadership and his party in defending the Dubai port deal.

CHRISTINE ROMANS: The oil-rich United Arab Emirates is a major investor in The Carlyle Group, the private equity investment firm where President Bush's father once served as senior adviser and is a who's who of former high-level government officials. Just last year, Dubai International Capital, a government-backed buyout firm, invested in an $8 billion Carlyle fund.

Another family connection, the president's brother, Neil Bush, has reportedly received funding for his educational software company from the UAE investors. A call to his company was not returned.

Then there is the cabinet connection. Treasury Secretary John Snow was chairman of railroad company CSX/. After he left the company for the White House, CSX sold its international port operations to Dubai Ports World for more than a billion dollars.

In Connecticut today, Snow told reporters he had no knowledge of that CSX sale. "I learned of this transaction probably the same way members of the Senate did, by reading about it in the newspapers."

Another administration connection, President Bush chose a Dubai Ports World executive to head the U.S. Maritime Administration. David Sanborn, the former director of Dubai Ports' European and Latin American operations, he was tapped just last month to lead the agency that oversees U.S. port operations.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Watchdog Group Files Ethics Complaint RE: Senator Santorum's House Loan

Progressive ethics watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has filed a complaint with the Senate Ethics Committee alleging that Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) violated the Senate Gift Rule by accepting a mortgage from The Philadelphia Trust Company, a bank that serves affluent clients, RAW STORY has learned.

The filing comes in response to an article in the American Prospect by Philadephia Daily News reporter Will Bunch.

The following is a release from CREW, who filed the complaint. Such a complaint is not a formal complaint, as only senators or congressmembers can file ethics complaints against other members.

Democrats have not filed an ethics complaint despite clamoring over a "culture of corruption" for their 2006 campaigns and myriad reports of unethical practices by Republican members of Congress. A handful of Democrats have also taken fire for ethics scandals.

Republicans have threatened to file complaints on Democratic members of Congress if Democrats file complaints against them, including against House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). As such, ethics inquiries in both chambers remain at a standstill.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
US Stuns Advocates Of New Rights Body Proposal

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States stunned U.N. officials and rights advocates on Thursday by threatening to reopen talks on a painfully negotiated resolution for a new U.N. Human Rights Council.

General Assembly President Jan Eliasson released a draft compromise text on the council to replace the discredited Geneva-based Human Rights Commission, which has included some of the world's worst rights violators.

The proposal sets a higher threshold for abusing nations to get a seat on the body and calls for a majority vote of all 191 General Assembly members, not just those present. Currently, nations are elected by regional slates in the 54-member Economic and Social Council.

The United States and other Western nations had wanted about 30 members rather than the 47 proposed in the text as well as a two-thirds vote to make it harder for rights abusers, such as Zimbabwe or Sudan, to gain a seat.

U.S. Ambassador John Bolton said he preferred "real" negotiations between governments rather than consultations with Eliasson or his mediators.

That could result in a line-by-line negotiation of the text, which would open the door to other critics of the new rights council, a reform demanded by world leaders at a U.N. summit in September. The council aims to continue the practice of investigating abusers and helping nations on human rights bodies and laws.

"Based on conversations we've had with other governments, the strongest argument in favor of this draft is that it's not as bad as it could be," Bolton told reporters. "So we will be studying it further."

Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Eliasson and human rights groups opposed Bolton's suggestions.

Annan said countries had had enough time for discussions, so "now is the time for a decision." He said the council was not everything he proposed a year ago but was better placed "to address situations of gross and systematic violations of human rights."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Report Probes US Custody Deaths

Almost 100 prisoners have died in US custody in Iraq and Afghanistan since August 2002, according to US group Human Rights First. The details were first aired on BBC television's Newsnight programme. Of the 98 deaths, at least 34 were suspected or confirmed homicides, the programme said.

The Pentagon told Newsnight it had not seen the report but took allegations of maltreatment "very seriously" and would prosecute if necessary.

The report, which is to be published on Wednesday, draws on information from Pentagon and other official US sources.

Torture: Human Rights First representative Deborah Pearlstein told Newsnight she was "extremely comfortable" that the information was reliable.

The report defines the 34 cases classified as homicides as "caused by intentional or reckless behaviour". It says another 11 cases have been deemed suspicious and that between eight and 12 prisoners were tortured to death.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Industries Get Quiet Protection From Lawsuits

Federal agencies are using arcane regulations and legal opinions to shield automakers and others from challenges by consumers and states.

Near sunrise on a summer morning in 2001, Patrick Parker of Childress, Texas, swerved to avoid a deer and rolled his pickup truck.

The roof of the Ford F-250 crumpled, and Parker didn't stand a chance. His neck broke and, at 37, he was paralyzed from the chest down. He sued, and Ford Motor Co. settled for an undisclosed amount. "You can imagine what happens when you're belted in and the roof comes down even with the door," Parker said. "Your options are death or quadriplegia."

Parker's case and hundreds like it are behind a beefed-up roof safety standard proposed in August by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. But safety regulators tucked into the proposed rule something vehicle makers have long desired: protection from future roof-crush lawsuits like the one Parker filed.

The surprise move seeking legal protection for automakers is one in a series of recent steps by federal agencies to shield leading industries from state regulation and civil lawsuits on the grounds that they conflict with federal authority.

Some of these efforts are already facing court challenges. However, through arcane regulatory actions and legal opinions, the Bush administration is providing industries with an unprecedented degree of protection at the expense of an individual's right to sue and a state's right to regulate.

White House Rejects House Democrats' Call for Special Counsel to Investigate NSA's Eavesdropping

WASHINGTON Feb 27, 2006 (AP)— The White House on Monday rejected the call by several House Democrats for a special counsel to investigate the Bush administration's eavesdropping program.

"I think that where these Democrats who are calling for this ought to spend their time is on what was the source of the unauthorized disclosure of this vital, incredible program in the war on terrorism," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said. "I really don't think there is any basis for a special counsel. … But the fact that this information was disclosed about the existence of this program has given the enemy some of our playbook."

In a letter released Monday, 18 House Democrats told Bush that Attorney General Alberto Gonzales should appoint a special counsel. They said the surveillance of terrorists must be done within the bounds of U.S. law, but complained that their efforts to get answers to legal and factual questions about the program have been stymied "generally based on the feeblest of excuses."

"If the effort to prevent vigorous and appropriate investigation succeeds, we fear the inexorable conclusion will be that these executive branch agencies hold themselves above the law and accountable to no one," wrote the lawmakers, led by Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., a member of the Judiciary and Homeland Security committees.

The lawmakers initially asked the independent watchdogs at the Justice and Defense departments to open inquiries. Both declined.

Certainly we cannot expect AG Gonzalez to investigate a policy and procedure that he has personally reviewed for possible problems... after all he is a "god" among lawyers and no one should dare to question his interpretation of the law, the Constitution or his ideology. God, himself, told President Bush to conduct these wiretaps. Who are we to question God?

At least that is the rumor Gonzalez, Cheney and Bush are spreading.

Is There A Case For Impeachment - Harpers Magazine Hosts Panel Discussion

The Case for Impeachment: Why We Can No Longer Afford George W. Bush - An excerpt from an essay in the March 2006 Harper's Magazine

"A country is not only what it does—it is also what it puts up with, what it tolerates. — Kurt Tucholsky"

Lately, we are tolerating a lot of unethical, unlawful and unconstitutional garbage at the direction of George W. Bush and the leadership of the GOP.

HARPER'S MAGAZINE PRESENTS: IS THERE A CASE FOR IMPEACHMENT?
Thursday, March 2, 8:00PM Town Hall
123 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10063
A PUBLIC FORUM FEATURING:

• Lewis H. Lapham, editor of Harper's Magazine


• Rep. John Conyers (D., Mich.), ranking member, U.S. House Judiciary Committee


• Michael Ratner, president, Center for Constitutional Rights


• Elizabeth Holtzman, member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee during Watergate


• John Dean, White House Counsel to President Nixon and author of Worse Than Watergate


• Moderated by Sam Seder, host of "The Majority Report" on Air America Radio

If I were in the NYC area, I would make an effort to attend. In lieu of my attending, I urge anyone living near NYC to attend if they can!

On December 18 of last year, Congressman John Conyers Jr. (D., Mich.) introduced into the House of Representatives a resolution inviting it to form “a select committee to investigate the Administration's intent to go to war before congressional authorization, manipulation of pre-war intelligence, encouraging and countenancing torture, retaliating against critics, and to make recommendations regarding grounds for possible impeachment.”

Conyers' call for the select committee has fallen on deaf ears. The Republican dominated congress has kowtowed to the president and his representatives out of a loyalty to their ultra-conservative ideology without regard for their oaths to support and defend the Constitution. The members of the House are supposed to call for the impeachment process when the president has committed acts that are even considered "misdemeanors":

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. - Article II, Section 4, US Constitution

Certainly there is ample evidence for misdemeanors. There is ample evidence that the decision to not supply proper armor that could have prevented over 80% of the deaths and injuries to our troops in combat is a criminal act for which Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld are directly responsible. Surely lying to the country about the intelligence that convinced the congress to pass the AUMF resolution is criminal... at least it ought to be. The Dubai Ports World smacks of bribery, if not a criminal disregard for national security. (Wouldn't that qualify as treasonous?) Certainly violation of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Ninth and Tenth Amendments of our Constitution is a crime in that it violates the oath of office. We know that the administration violated FISA in its wiretapping efforts, as well as violating the law in terms of conducting a mandated review of the DPW deal.

What is it going to take for the members of the House to start the process and respond to Conyers' clarion call?

Although buttressed two days previously by the news of the National Security Agency's illegal surveillance of the American citizenry, the request attracted little or no attention in the press—nothing on television or in the major papers, some scattered applause from the left-wing blogs, heavy sarcasm on the websites flying the flags of the militant right. The nearly complete silence raised the question as to what it was the congressman had in mind, and to whom did he think he was speaking?

A true display of the arrogance of the entire GOP and the cowardice of the Democrats. The Republicans think themselves above the law by divine right given to them by the ultra-conservative Christian right. The Democrats think themselves unable to stand up to the Republican onslaught of political maneuvers because the Democrats have lost the moral compass that used to be theirs to claim under leadership by FDR, JFK and LBJ (not that these folks were not without their faults). But the Preamble of the Constitution gives us six basic purposes of government in a free society... and the Democrats have ignored the authority of the Preamble while the Republicans have abused their authority under the the entire document.

In time of war few propositions would seem as futile as the attempt to impeach a president whose political party controls the Congress; as the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee stationed on Capitol Hill for the last forty years, Representative Conyers presumably knew that to expect the Republican caucus in the House to take note of his invitation, much less arm it with the power of subpoena, was to expect a miracle of democratic transformation and rebirth not unlike the one looked for by President Bush under the prayer rugs in Baghdad

.
But we are not in a state of war. Congress passed a resolution authorizing the use of military force against terrorists and those that support terrorism. The AUMF makes the invasion of Iraq entirely illegal because the president and his gang LIED to us to convince the country that Saddam Hussein was involved in WMD and supporting Al-Qaeda... none of which has proven to be true. However, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Yemen, UAE, Syria and a few other places certainly have Al-Qaeda connections. Iran presents a global nuclear threat. But none of those countries are subject to US actions under the AUMF resoltuion (not that I want to see us exercise the AUMF in that fashion).

But we have NOT declared a war against a sovereign nation and the term "war on terror" is a misnomer by rhetoric, cause and action. It is a term that has been used to justify the breach of our inherent rights. It is a phrase used to justify an unjust invasion of a country that posed no great threat to our sovereignty or safety. It is rhetoric used to empower those in the administration to brow-beat us into a state of fear. And it is a rhetoric used to support an obviously flawed and failed national security plan... if we can call it a plan.

Unless the congressman [Conyers] intended some sort of symbolic gesture, self-serving and harmless, what did he hope to prove or to gain? He answered the question in early January, on the phone from Detroit during the congressional winter recess.

“To take away the excuse,” he said, “that we didn't know.” So that two or four or ten years from now, if somebody should ask, “Where were you, Conyers, and where was the United States Congress?” when the Bush Administration declared the Constitution inoperative and revoked the license of parliamentary government, none of the company now present can plead ignorance or temporary insanity, can say that “somehow it escaped our notice” that the President was setting himself up as a supreme leader exempt from the rule of law.

A reason with which it was hard to argue but one that didn't account for the congressman's impatience. Why not wait for a showing of supportive public opinion, delay the motion to impeach until after next November's elections?

The only thing Conyers had to gain was the sense of integrity from speaking out according to one's sense of duty and conviction.

Assuming that further investigation of the President's addiction to the uses of domestic espionage finds him nullifying the Fourth Amendment rights of a large number of his fellow Americans, the Democrats possibly could come up with enough votes, their own and a quorum of disenchanted Republicans, to send the man home to Texas. Conyers said:

“I don't think enough people know how much damage this administration can do to their civil liberties in a very short time. What would you have me do? Grumble and complain? Make cynical jokes? Throw up my hands and say that under the circumstances nothing can be done? At least I can muster the facts, establish a record, tell the story that ought to be front-page news.”

I agree... not enough people know the damage this administration HAS DONE to our civil liberties and our standing in the international community. We are supposed to be the "good guys" that live by principles carved in our hearts and embodied in out Constitution.

Our current leadership in the White House, Senate, House of Representatives, and the Supreme Court are despicable examples of American law, decency and spirit.

Urinating On Our Legs & Telling Stories About Port Security

Video Clip from Lou Dobbs:

"This deal [Dubai Ports World] would not go forward, IF we were concerned with the security of this nation." - President George W. Bush [emphasis added]

Reading this statement carefully, we can see a latent meaning:

IF we were concerned with the security of this nation this deal would not go forward.

Obviously, the Bush administration is not concerned, despite the fear-mongering it has engaged in since 9-11, with the security of this nation.

• Dubai Ports World deal goes "unnoticed" by President Bush... claiming he learned of the deal just a week or two ago.


• Airport security is still a joke and is extremely ineffective.


• The Coast Guard is ill-equipped and under-manned to perform all the tasks to safeguard our ports.


• The Coast Guard has one member of its service for every 83 miles of coastline.


• The Coast Guard raised concerns about the DPW deal and were ignored or dismissed.


• Customs is under-staffed and only physically searching 5-6% of all containers.


• The screening technology used to "screen" these containers is inefficent.


• The containers brought to US ports are unsecure from the points of origin.


• The containers received are shipped by rail and truck across the nation.


• The top model for port security, owned and operated by DPW in Dubai, is poorly protected.


• The UAE, including Dubai, has had close contacts with Osama bib Laden in the past.


• The highest court in the United Kingdom is hearing a case that could prevent the DPW purchase of P&O from going through for national security reasons in Britain.


• US National Guard troop numbers are dwindling, the funding for all reserve units is being cut, US governors are complaining about the depletion of emergency forces, and many of the National Guard assets are away from our shores in Iraq and Afghanistan.


• We are spending far too much money on technology solutions without first developing the essential layers of security, including having adequate numbers of personnel, adequate training, and adequate pay to retain qualified people on the job.


• We can't seem to get a straight answer from the Bush administration or the GOP leadership. They are either ill-informed, manipulating the facts, fighting off scandals, spinning the news, or claiming privilege over national security secrets.


• Our chemical plants, fuel plants, nuclear power plants, trucking depots, railways, railroad yards, and highways are increasingly at risk for a 9-11 style attack.


• Our southern borders, southern coast lines, and even our northern borders are permeable by illegal aliens, leaving us at risk for infiltration.


• Our own response to disasters on our own shores has shown the Department of Homeland Security, FEMA, the National Guard, INS, Border Patrol, and local/state governments not able to respond adequately.


• DPW will have control and/or ownership of 22 US ports on March 2, 2006, whether the administration conducts a lawful review of the deal or not.


• The DPW deal has not followed legal due process in any way, shape or form, but has been fully endorsed by President Bush, even though he was COMPLETELY UNAWARE of the deal just a few days before the media storm about it.

Our own government hasn't got a handle on the scope and breadth of the national security issues. We are spending over a half a trillion dollars of tax payer money in places overseas while we are CUTTING funding for our own infrastructure, personnel and procedures here on our own soil.

Somebody has to stop urinating on our legs and telling us that the weather man has predicted rain.

So Much For Respecting Vets & Their Sacrifices

Veterans May Face Budget Cuts in 2008

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.

Being a veteran, I know that what the VA considers "non-critical medical issues" is not the same as what most reasonable people would consider non-critical. The VA has been in the business of denying care to veteran's for years. They denied care for agent orange-related illnesses. They have wrangled the issues of PTSD as illegitimate for Vietnam, Desert Storm, Afghanistan and Iraqi invasion veterans. The VA is never fully funded and often runs out of its budget before the end of the fiscal year. Now we have war veterans coming home that may be denied care, as well as vets that faithfully performed their duties and were promised care in return for their honorable service. We are a nation that has a habit of praising our veterans and then denying them the services that were promised as part of their sacrifice for our nation. World War I vets had to march on Washington to get their pay as promised. Civil War vets were denied care and benefits.

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.

In fact, the proposed cuts are so draconian that it seems to some that the White House is simply making them up to make its long-term deficit figures look better. More realistic numbers, however, would raise doubts as to whether Bush can keep his promise to wrestle the deficit under control by the time he leaves office.

Is that really surprising. Where is the genuine thankfulness and appreciation for the service of our veterans? Veterans put their lives on hold, risk their lives and well-being every day while serving--even those serving during times of peace--and we do not give them their due. Shame!

"Either the administration is proposing gutting VA health care over the next five years or it is not serious about its own budget," said Rep. Chet Edwards (news, bio, voting record) of Texas, top Democrat on the panel overseeing the VA's budget. "If the proposals aren't serious, then that would undermine the administration's argument that they intend to reduce the deficit in half over the next several years."

In fact, the White House doesn't seem serious about the numbers. It says the long-term budget numbers don't represent actual administration policies. Similar cuts assumed in earlier budgets have been reversed.

"Instead, the president's subsequent budgets have increased funding for all of these programs," said White House budget office spokesman Scott Milburn. "The country can meet the goal of cutting the deficit in half and still invest in key programs for vulnerable Americans, and claims to the contrary aren't supported by the facts of recent budget history."

The veterans' medical care cuts would come even though more and more people are trying to enter the system and as the number of people wounded in Iraq keeps rising. Even though Iraq war veterans represent only about 2 percent of the Veterans Administration's patient caseload, many are returning from battle with grievous injuries requiring costly care.

Say it here, spin it there, but never deliver anywhere!

US Coast Guard Warns About DPW Port Deal

Paper: Coast Guard Has Port Co. Intel Gaps

Citing broad gaps in U.S. intelligence, the Coast Guard cautioned the Bush administration weeks ago that it could not determine whether a United Arab Emirates-based company seeking a stake in some U.S. port operations might support terrorist operations.

The disclosure came during a hearing Monday on Dubai-owned DP World's plans to take over significant operations at six leading U.S. ports.

The Bush administration said the Coast Guard's concerns were raised during its review of the deal, which it approved Jan. 17, and that all those questions were resolved.

The port operations are now handled by London-based Peninsular & Oriental Steam Navigation Co.

"There are many intelligence gaps, concerning the potential for DPW or P&O assets to support terrorist operations, that precludes an overall threat assessment" of the potential merger, the unclassified Coast Guard intelligence assessment said.

"The breadth of the intelligence gaps also infer potential unknown threats against a large number of potential vulnerabilities," the assessment said.

The Coast Guard said the concerns reflected in the document ultimately were addressed. In a statement, the Coast Guard said other U.S. intelligence agencies were able to provide answers to the questions it raised.

"The Coast Guard, the intelligence community and the entire CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States) panel believed this transaction received the proper review, and national security concerns were, in fact, addressed," the Coast Guard said.

Some admiral got his butt reamed for producing this paper and promptly did an about face as ordered. What else can we expect from career officers that are ordered to speak "the truth" as told to them by someone in the chain of command. The original document was probably right on the money, produced in earnest by a staff officer that had nothing but the mission in mind, and cannot speak up for fear of reprisal. The Bush agenda wins again... and how would we know if it didn't? The record thus far tells us that the Bush Gang will manipulate the press, the policy and our actions axccording to a pre-set agenda no matter what the intel says.

Port Security Still In The News: At Dubai Model Port & In The US

Gaps in Security Stretch From Model Port in Dubai to U.S.

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates, Feb. 25 — To some American officials, the sprawling port along the Persian Gulf here, where steel shipping containers are stacked row after row as far as the eye can see, is a model for the post-9/11 world.

Fences enclose the port's perimeter, which is patrolled by guards. Gamma-ray scanners peek inside containers to make sure they carry the clothing, aluminum, timber and other goods listed on shipping records. Radiation detectors search for any hidden nuclear material.

But those antiterrorism measures still fall far short of what is needed to ensure security, American government auditors and maritime experts say.

If the port in Dubai is a model, and it fails to meet muster, what does that say about our own ports that are in no way close to the Dubai model?

The scanning devices, for example, can check only a small fraction of the millions of containers that flow through here every year. The radiation detectors most likely would not pick up a key radioactive ingredient in a nuclear bomb, even if it was just modestly shielded. And the system that selects containers for inspection relies upon often-incomplete data.

In short, even at this model port, the security regimen set up in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, largely at the request of the United States government, is far from enough to address the vulnerabilities that make ports still such an attractive terrorist target.

I feel affirmed... I've been saying and writing about these security flaws at our ports since 1995! And so have a lot of other folks with better credentials and a lot more experience with national security than me. Our ports are a tremendous liability and connects the entire nation via trucks, railways and shipping lanes.

It explains why so many port experts consider as misplaced the furor that erupted this week over whether Dubai Ports World, the government-owned company that operates this port, should be allowed to take over management of terminals in six American cities.

I disagree. I think we need to take even more stringent steps to assure port security, including limiting ownership and operation under specific regulations, requiring inspections at both the points of origin and receipt, setting up mutual security credentials and certification processes, as well as putting more people on the ground for inspection and security purposes.

The trouble is not focused at the end of the line — the port terminal at the American shore. It is spread up and down the supply chain at critical points across the globe, no matter what the United States government and partners like United Arab Emirates have so far tried.

It also goes to our rail yards, trucking depots, manufacturing plants, food stores and elswhere along the highways and biways of our nation. When we talk about "single points of failure" (SPOFs), our ports and the supply chain they support are a long chain of SPOFs.

Bush Depleting National Guard Strengths - National Security At Risk

WASHINGTON Feb 27, 2006 (AP)­ President Bush thanked the nation's governors Monday for their support of National Guard troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, even as state leaders are warning Bush's budget plans will cut Guard strength and leave states less able to respond to homegrown emergencies. The governors, attending the winter meeting of the National Governors Association, hoped for answers during a private meeting with Bush and a private lunch later with Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.

Did they get any answers? The National Guard was never meant to be first responders to combat areas. The way it is supposed to work is ACTIVE DUTY first, RESERVE units second, and NATIONAL GUARD units only when and as needed. The exception to the rule is when a unit has special skills and abilities, like the Chemical Response Unit from New York which deal with chemical exposure decontamination.

"I can't thank you enough for not only supporting the troops in harm's way, but providing great comfort to the families as well," Bush told the governors before going into a private meeting to answer a few of their questions.

But can we support the troops by providing them the armor that would save their lives and prevent catastrophic injuries... by over 80%!!!

Governors are united in their stance that the administration shouldn't reduce spending for the Guard. Their meeting with Rumsfeld was sought to address those concerns. "We're going to fight that tooth and nail," said Republican Gov. Bob Taft of Ohio. "The National Guard is not just important from the standpoint of disaster response in the state of Ohio, and homeland security, but is crucial for overall military preparedness. It would be a real mistake to cut back."

The National Guard is part of each state's disaster response plan. Having these troops federalized and serving overseas is undermining homeland security and weakening our ability to respond to natural disasters, man-made disasters or terrorist attacks.

Bush's 2007 budget submission would support a state-controlled National Guard of about 333,000 citizen soldiers the current total rather than the 350,000 authorized by Congress. It also proposes to pay for 188,000 Army Reserve troops rather than the 205,000 authorized by Congress.

Maybe it's time for independent militias to be formed again. We have a federal law that allows for community-based militia. Besides, militias are all the rage this year, especially in Iraq, Afghanistan and Palestine.

Republican Gov. Dirk Kempthorne of Idaho said the administration has since signaled it would not push for that reduction in strength, but he questioned whether the cuts within the Pentagon's spending proposals wouldn't end up forcing reductions anyway. Those plans would cut $789 million next year, totaling $5.3 billion over five years, Kempthorne said.

We have to pay for the tax breaks for the excessively rich somehow... So let us cut our military forces and once again eliminate personnel in favor of technological toys.

All 50 governors signed onto a letter to Bush earlier this month that opposed any cuts to the Guard. "We're getting ready for tsunamis. We're getting ready for earthquakes. We're getting ready for forest fires," said Democratic Gov. Chris Gregoire of Washington state. "Cut all that back and I think you're left with a really troublesome situation."

Amen, brother Gregoire. Amen! This strategy betrays the fact that the Bush administration cannot manage the national security issues that we face... and will not listen to the folks that are trying to lead the nation in the right direction.

By the way, do not pay any attention to those background clicks on your phone... It's just your friendly naighborhood NSA agents performing a useless tap of your phone.

Calamity George... Or How I Flushed The GOP Down The Drain

Analysis: Bush Beset by Political Miscues

WASHINGTON Feb 27, 2006 (AP)— President Bush has been buffeted by one calamity after another. Try what he may, he just can't seem to find traction for his second-term agenda. With midterm congressional elections approaching, it won't get any easier.

Traction? He's got the GOP going in reverse at high speeds. I know staunch conservatives that are backing away from him and the GOP leadership. Some are even thinking about voting Democratic as a slate.

The bad news has been coming in waves, from furors over Hurricane Katrina and warrantless wiretapping to the error-plagued rollout of the new Medicare prescription drug program, Vice President Dick Cheney's hunting accident, growing civil strife in Iraq, and now the Republican revolt over the administration's Dubai port decision.

Gee... aren't we forgetting a few scandals in congress? And what about Libby, Rove, Cheney and the Plame CIA leak? And the hits just keep on coming!

The controversies have rocked the White House and caused alarm among Republican strategists. Their party's electoral hopes in November may depend on whether Bush is able to right his troubled presidency.

In that case, why don't we just elimnate GOP candidates (including incumbents) from the ticket and only allow Independents, Green Party, Libertarians, Reform Party and Democrats on the ticket? Okay, we can even skip the Dems.

"I'm a big reformer. And it's time to reform congressional relations at the White House," said Scott Reed, a GOP consultant who managed Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign.

Can't be too much of a reformer if he signed on with Bob Dole... Didn't he just agree to be a lobbyist for the Dubai deal? Can you claim reformer credentials if your support went to someone that was completely entrenched in the system? Reformer of what? How to get paid for influence peddling?

Obsession Or Distraction: Rove Has A Roving Eye

Sen. Clinton Says Rove Obsesses About Her

Judging from the number of jokes about Hilary Clinton on a daily basis, Rove is not the only ultra-conservative Republican that shares this obsession. But I cannot figure out why she is getting all their attention. Surely the Democrats cannot be thinking about her as a viable candidate. In my view she has far too much baggage... and I am not just talking about "Bubba."

ALBANY, N.Y. Feb 27, 2006 (AP)— Reacting to a new book quoting Karl Rove as saying she will be the 2008 Democratic nominee for president, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said Monday that President Bush's chief political strategist "spends a lot of time obsessing about me."

The former first lady also said she believed Rove, national GOP Chairman Ken Mehlman and other Republicans are using her to divert attention from Republican problems as the 2006 congressional elections approach.

Any port in a storm... Ooops, I brought up the "P" word. No one wants to have us focus on the scandals, mistakes and incompetencies that the GOP has brought us under the leadership of Dubya and his White House Gang, Hastert, Frist and a whole slew of folks that may soon be appearing in court.

"Karl Rove is a brilliant strategist. So, if I were thinking about this," she told WROW-AM radio in Albany, "I'd say, why are they spending so much time talking about me?"

Now, see I would not have been so nice. I would have called Karl Rove a manipulative oportunistic SOB that knows how to mislead, distract and unfocus an entire nation while his bosses violate the Constitution and disregard inherent rights. But that's another reason why we cannot give our attention to Hilary... she won't call them the way she sees them. She prefers to follow the lead of politicians and spin, spin, spin, lie, spin, spin, mislead, spin, spin, distract, spin, spin and spin again.

"What they're hoping is that all of their missteps, which are now numbering in the hundreds, are going to somehow be overlooked because people, instead of focusing on the '06 election, will jump ahead and think about the next one," said Clinton, D-N.Y.

"Yes, and all Bill did was get his rocks off in the Oval Office." Well, at least that was with an adult that was willing to get on her knees to do the deeds... but I still can't figure out why she kept the stain on the dress.

Say what you want about old Bubba, but he didn't lead us into an illegal invasion, didn't spy on US citizens, and, as we found out via the White Water investigation, didn't take any money. So, Bubba was a cheat (at least in terms of his marriage vows) and a liar ("I did not have sexual relations with that woman."). In that regard, he could have done better... but how many of our well-established politicians are also cheats and liars? Kennedy, Biden, Kerry, Hatch, Delay, Cunningham, DeWine???? Are they in that special category? If we cast out all of the liars and cheats occupying high office in DC we might grind the wheels of government to a halt... Wait... Would that be so bad?

In the new book out Monday from Regnery Publishing, "Strategery" by Bill Sammon, Rove is quoted as saying: "Anybody who thinks that she's not going to be the candidate is kidding themselves."

I am not kidding about this... If Hilary Clinton is the Democratic candidate, we are going to see another Republican in office for 2009-2012. If she decides to run in the primaries she is going to screw the pooch for the Democrats. The focus will be on Hilary rather than electing someone with the leadership and charisma we need to take us away from the ultra-conservative hogwash and restore sanity to our domestic, foreign and national security policies.

Rove is also quoted as says he thinks Clinton could have difficulty in the general election, in part, because there is a "brittleness about her."

Is that a polite way of calling her the "B" word? What politician doesn't have some "brittleness" about them. Rove is a walking rectum... and a dirty one at that... and he works for a hypocritical liar of exponential proportions who should be impeached for the dishonorable things he has done to our troops, never mind the spying. But gee whiz Mr. Rove, Hilary has never called you names in public.

But, Karl, me bucko, why are you so obsessesed with what Hilary might do?

Edward Copeland's Institute of Lower Learning - 02-27-06

The Institute For Lower Learning

After a slow few days, important topics are busting out all over and
on nearly every continent. The Dubai port controversy seems to have
subsided -- that is so last week -- so let's see what new Bush
Administration fuckup springs forward this week. The way things are
going, looking at today's items, it seems like it's an oldie but a
baddie -- Iraq.

Now the index:

Iraq, Part 1: The curfew has slowed the violence, but it has also left
Iraqi families trapped in their homes with dwindling food and
supplies. Meanwhile, neighboring countries fear a Sunni-Shiite
conflict will spread to them.

Iraq, Part 2: Dubya unites -- all 50 state governors against what his
policies have done to their National Guards.

Iraq, Part 3: What's a little fraud between friends? Halliburton
subsidiary KBR will get paid most for most of its contract, despite
government audits finding overcharging.

Problems with Putin: The International Herald Tribune has a lengthy
analysis of how the changes in Russia that Dubya has largely ignored
could end up being another one of his huge mistakes.

Call for special counsel: 18 House Democrats are demanding the Bush
and Alberto Gonzales appoint a special counsel to investigate the NSA
program. The big question -- why are there only 18 names on the
letter?

Plan B: As the FDA refuses to make a decision on making the
morning-after pill available without a prescription, states are
entering the fray -- with moves for and against the pill breaking down
largely along red and blue state lines.

Vanishing relief: Nearly 2/3 of the billions raised for hurricane
relief has already been disbursed by charities -- with much work left
to be done. On a sidenote, a new report shows how much the American
Red Cross has spent to try to boost its image.

DeLay loses another one: The Hammer tried to use the IRS to go after a
perceived enemy -- but the IRS exonerated the group and is raising
questions about improper use of their audits.

Exiles in Egypt: People escaping war-torn Sudan are finding bigotry
and roadblocks in their new home.

Wal-Mart begs: Their CEO pleads with governors not to punish the
retailer with legislation over their mistreatment of workers.

An Effective Investment/Retirement Plan

If you had purchased $1,000 of Nortel stock one year ago, it would now be worth $49. With Enron, you would have $16.50 left of the original $1,000. With WorldCom, you would have less than $5 left.

But if you had purchased $1,000 worth of beer one year ago, drank all the beer, then turned in the cans for the aluminum recycling price, you would have $214. Based on the above, current investment advice is to drink heavily and recycle.

It's called the 401 Keg Plan.

Sounds almost as good as the retirement plan that calls for paying your social security payments to get a permanent cabin on a cruise ship.

The Shame of the United Nations... The Shame Of The US

The Shame of the United Nations

When it comes to reforming the disgraceful United Nations Human Rights Commission, America's ambassador, John Bolton, is right; Secretary General Kofi Annan is wrong; and leading international human rights groups have unwisely put their preference for multilateral consensus ahead of their duty to fight for the strongest possible human rights protection. A once-promising reform proposal has been so watered down that it has become an ugly sham, offering cover to an unacceptable status quo. It should be renegotiated or rejected.

Some of the world's most abusive regimes have won seats on the Human Rights Commission and used them to insulate themselves from criticism. Current members include Sudan, which is carrying out genocide; Nepal, whose absolute monarch has suspended basic liberties; and Saudi Arabia, where women have few rights. All are gross violators of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the commission's founding document.

For all the spouting off that Ambassador Bolton may do, he is ignoring the fact that the US has had a heavy hand in derailing human rights efforts via the UN and other diplomatic avenues. Our record of compliance and support for human rights initiatives is poor at best. We circumvent international laws on a regular basis, especially since the beginning of our invasion of Iraq, the development of detention prisons at Gitmo, the Abu Ghraib fiascos, and our denial of events in Africa that should have resulted in international cooperation and intervention to stop genocidal attacks and crimes against humanity.

The US government holds to a very confusing standard of ethics and foreign relations, expecting everyone but us to adhere to treaties and principles of human rights and decency. It would be one thing if this was a mere single voice criticism, but there are complaints about our behavior coming from the Vatican, NATO, the UN and elsewhere.

I, for one, am not a big fan of dual or multiplicitous standards.

I Thought We Didn't Allow Torture?

A Judicial Green Light for Torture

The administration's tendency to dodge accountability for lawless actions by resorting to secrecy and claims of national security is on sharp display in the case of a Syrian-born Canadian, Maher Arar, who spent months under torture because of United States action. A federal trial judge in Brooklyn has refused to stand up to the executive branch, in a decision that is both chilling and ripe for prompt overturning.

Mr. Arar, a 35-year-old software engineer whose case has been detailed in a pair of columns by Bob Herbert, was detained at Kennedy Airport in 2002 while on his way home from a family vacation. He was held in solitary confinement in a Brooklyn detention center and interrogated without proper access to legal counsel. Finally, he was shipped off to a Syrian prison. There, he was held for 10 months in an underground rat-infested dungeon and brutally tortured because officials suspected that he was a member of Al Qaeda. All this was part of a morally and legally unsupportable United States practice known as "extraordinary rendition," in which the federal government outsources interrogations to regimes known to use torture and lacking fundamental human rights protections.

The maltreatment of Mr. Arar would be reprehensible — and illegal under the United States Constitution and applicable treaties — even had the suspicions of terrorist involvement proven true. But no link to any terrorist organization or activity emerged, which is why the Syrians eventually released him. Mr. Arar then sued for damages.

The judge in the case, David Trager of Federal District Court in Brooklyn, did not dispute that United States officials had reason to know that Mr. Arar faced a likelihood of torture in Syria. But he took the rare step of blocking the lawsuit entirely, saying that the use of torture in rendition cases is a foreign policy question not appropriate for court review, and that going forward would mean disclosing state secrets.

It is hard to see why resolving Mr. Arar's case would necessitate the revelation of privileged material. Moreover, as the Supreme Court made clear in a pair of 2004 decisions rebuking the government for its policies of holding foreign terrorism suspects in an indefinite legal limbo in Guantánamo and elsewhere, even during the war on terror, the government's actions are subject to court review and must adhere to the rule of law.

With the Bush administration claiming imperial powers to detain, spy on and even torture people, and the Republican Congress stuck largely in enabling mode, the role of judges in checking executive branch excesses becomes all the more crucial. If the courts collapse when confronted with spurious government claims about the needs of national security, so will basic American liberties.

Do we really believe the Bush administration when its representatives claim that we do not allow torture and that there is nothing inappropriate about rendition... Just ask George "Trust Me" Bush if there are any other problem cases in the news stream...

Specter Raises The Spectre Of Judicial Oversight

Specter Proposes NSA Surveillance Rules: Measure Would Make Administration Seek FISA Court's Permission to Eavesdrop

The federal government would have to obtain permission from a secret court to continue a controversial form of surveillance, which the National Security Agency now conducts without warrants, under a bill being proposed by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.).

Specter's proposal would bring the four-year-old NSA program under the authority of the court created by the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The act created a mechanism for obtaining warrants to wiretap domestic suspects. But President Bush, shortly after the 2001 terrorist attacks, authorized the NSA to eavesdrop on communications without such warrants. The program was revealed in news reports two months ago.

Specter's plan could put him at odds with the administration, which has praised a rival proposal that would exempt the NSA program from the surveillance law. Specter's proposal would also require the administration to give a handful of lawmakers more information about the program than they now receive, such as the number of communications intercepted and a summary of the results.

The draft version of Specter's bill, which is circulating in intelligence and legal circles, would require the attorney general to seek the FISA court's approval for each planned NSA intercept under the program. Bush has said the agency monitors phone calls and e-mails between people in the United States and people abroad when any of them is thought to have possible terrorist ties.

Specter's bill would require the attorney general to give the secret court "a statement of the facts and circumstances" causing the Justice Department to believe "that at least one of the participants in the communications to be intercepted . . . will be the foreign power or agent of a foreign power specified in [the law], or a person who has had communication with the foreign power or agent." The attorney general would have to provide "a detailed description of the nature of the information sought" and "an estimate of the number of communications to be intercepted . . . during the requested authorization period."

Can't wait to hear the howls from Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice and Gonzalez!

FTC Takes An Interest In Data Security... ABOUT TIME!

Confronting the Legal and Business Realities of Data Security

With all the breaches of security involving customer identifying information and account data, there has never been a specific federal law that deals with these issues. But these breaches are serious risks to consumers. So now comes the Federal Trade Commission to the rescue... so to speak.

Just two years ago, the number of privacy and security laws was limited and applied only to companies in certain industries, or those that had international operations. Today the number of laws is staggering. Many states have stepped into the breach and enacted legislation requiring data security, as well as notice to consumers when security breaches occur. Moreover, although there is no federal law that generally requires information security, recent Federal Trade Commission actions indicate that the FTC is, for the first time, imposing a generalized duty to establish information security via the Federal Trade Commission Act.

Compliance with these laws is not only a legal reality, but also a business one, as the frequent and well-publicized data security incidents demonstrate. New notice laws require companies to advise customers of the high-profile data security incidents that frequently make headlines. Companies must now deal with increasingly complex requirements that are not consistent across all states. The price of failure can be high -- including significant penalties as well as unfavorable press coverage.

Can it be that the FTC is actually concerning itself with customer complaints during an ultra-conservative, pro-big business, Republican administration. Color me confused... but happy to see it.

FTC'S ROAD TO DATA SECURITY

The FTC has shown that it will take steps to protect data security, even in the absence of explicit statutory requirements. In the past, the FTC only brought enforcement actions against companies that represented they had security in place, when in fact they did not.

Recent cases only further demonstrate the FTC's commitment to protecting consumer's sensitive information. In a case involving CardSystems Solutions Inc., that arose from the allegation that a vast number of consumers' credit card numbers were exposed, the FTC brought an enforcement action even though it could not obtain any civil penalties in the case. The FTC did, however, obtain a consent order that places additional security burdens upon the company. Notably, the judge rejected the FTC's request to provide notice to the effected consumers because there was no showing of immediate harm, particularly in light of the credit card companies so called "zero liability" policies for consumers.

Won't there be complaints from the far-right about "legislating" from the executive branch and "executive activism"? Will the stacked federal bench support this move? Will Rocky and Bullwinkle escape the dastardly plan hatched by Boris and Natasha? Tune in next week for...????

As you can tell, I am a bit skeptical and cynical. The FTC has a record of "under performing" during Republican administrations. While I applaud and approve the plan to spread the FTC umbrella to include these data security issues, one has to wonder if the current administration is up to the task. After all, it can't seem to keep its own data secure or explain all of its major screw ups.

Another notable case that shows the FTC is following a new path involves footwear retailer DSW. DSW involved allegations that there were failures of network security for customer data, including financial data. The FTC brought an enforcement action against DSW because of alleged security breaches involving customer data. However, unlike prior cases, DSW had not made specific representations to consumers regarding security. This did not stop the FTC from claiming that the alleged lack of security constituted an unfair business practice under the FTC Act, which in turn led to the FTC seeking significant sanctions against the company. In most cases, including DSW, any resolution with the FTC requires significant monitoring and reporting to the FTC regarding data security and privacy.

This is surely going to meet with some resistance from the lobbyists. I wonder what kind of "lucrative favors" they will be offering to assuage the assaults on business as usual? Maybe I need a job interviewing lobbyists for some Washington big wig?

Another Bright & Shining Moment Of Security

For all the talk about security and improvement of the forces that are "over there" in Afghanistan and Iraq, we still cannot seem to keep the prisons running properly, the police from torturing or killing detainees and/or prisoners, the insurgents from killing the police (or our troops), bombs from exploding in secure areas, or riots from happening inside the prisons.

Militant Inmates Riot and Seize Control of Cellblock in Afghan Prison

PUL-I-CHARKHI, Afghanistan, Feb. 26 — Prisoners in Afghanistan's main high-security prison, among them people accused of being members of the Taliban and Al Qaeda, rioted and seized control of one cellblock on Saturday evening, battling with guards through the night, the Afghan authorities said Sunday.

Up to 5 prisoners were killed and 31 wounded as police guards opened fire to stop them from escaping when the violence began, a health worker at the prison said, based on information from the prison doctor. Sporadic gunfire could be heard outside the prison on Sunday.

The Afghan authorities moved in about 300 soldiers and seven tanks to surround the prison, near Kabul, the capital. The prison houses about 2,000 inmates, including 70 women. The prisoners include ordinary criminals and about 350 prisoners thought to be fighters for the country's ousted Taliban movement or for Al Qaeda. There are also three Americans, two former soldiers, Jonathan K. Idema and Brent Bennett, who were found guilty of running a private jail in Afghanistan, and a free-lance cameraman, Edward Caraballo, who was convicted with them.

Prison officials blamed Taliban and Al Qaeda prisoners for starting the riot, which began with a protest by prisoners over being required to wear uniforms. "They broke the locks of their cells and broke through a wall to the female section and entered the women's cells," said Muhammad Qasem Hashemzai, the deputy justice minister. The women, some of whom have children with them, did not seem to have been harmed, he said.

Prisoners could be seen behind the barred windows of Cellblock 1 on Sunday. They were hanging the light-blue new prison clothes out the windows on metal bedsteads and setting fire to them. Bullet holes pocked the windows of the cellblock from the shooting on Saturday night. The prisoners were shouting, "Long live Islam, long live the prisoners, death to Bush, death to Karzai," a reference to President Hamid Karzai.

The prison in Pul-i-Charkhi, a large pentagon-shaped prison built in the 1970's, became notorious during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan when tens of thousands of opponents were imprisoned and executed and buried in mass graves nearby.

We'z Gutta Git Us One Dem Dar G'ment Contracts

Army to Pay Halliburton Unit Most Costs Disputed by Audit

The federal government must think us hicks and fools to believe that any part of these no-bid/no review contracts are not full of waste and gouging.

The Army has decided to reimburse a Halliburton subsidiary for nearly all of its disputed costs on a $2.41 billion no-bid contract to deliver fuel and repair oil equipment in Iraq, even though the Pentagon's own auditors had identified more than $250 million in charges as potentially excessive or unjustified.

The Army said in response to questions on Friday that questionable business practices by the subsidiary, Kellogg Brown & Root, had in some cases driven up the company's costs. But in the haste and peril of war, it had largely done as well as could be expected, the Army said, and aside from a few penalties, the government was compelled to reimburse the company for its costs.

It might be worth the millions it might take to develop a defense contractor firm if we can get in good with the Bush administration and those folks that look the other way when we gouge the hell out of the price for goods and services. My wife is an accountant who puts tight controls on corporate expenditures. Why don't we have a whole slew of independent bean counters looking over the books of defnse contractors?

Under the type of contract awarded to the company, "the contractor is not required to perform perfectly to be entitled to reimbursement," said Rhonda James, a spokeswoman for the southwestern division of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, based in Dallas, where the contract is administered.

Perfectly my eye. These folks are not performing well, never mind perfectly:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Auditors Find Widespread Waste and Unfinished Work in Iraqi Rebuilding Contracts - 31 JAN 06

A sweeping examination of thousands of contracts that the United States underwrote with Iraqi money has provided the most comprehensive look yet at the confusion, waste and lack of accountability in rebuilding and training programs during the first years of the American-led occupation, say the Iraqi finance minister and a retired American officer who led an investigative arm of the audit.

The effort, which is being undertaken by a contracting office in Baghdad that reports to the United States Army and which has not previously been disclosed, began in March 2005 and is close to completion. Previous audits have focused more narrowly on construction contracts and work done in specific areas of Iraq.

The audit of about 9,000 contracts worth at least $5.8 billion in Iraqi oil money and assets seized from Saddam Hussein's government was undertaken to determine how much of the money originally set aside for the work should ultimately be paid.

The contracts in the new examination cover everything from purchases of pistols, radios and four-wheel-drive vehicles for the Iraqi Army to construction of hospitals and power lines to support fledgling Iraqi media outlets.

The examination exposed a system riddled with problems, like projects that were assigned but never carried out and Iraqi subcontractors who did not know they had been awarded jobs, the American officer, Scott Meehan, a retired Army major, said yesterday. He worked on the project from March through August 2005, when roughly 2,000 of the contracts were examined.

Ali Allawi, the Iraqi finance minister, said in a telephone interview over the weekend, "I think you're seeing chaos, basically," and added, "No matter how you cut it, it's very poor project design and implementation."

Mr. Allawi said the American administration brought with it a contracting procedure that may have worked in the orderly environment of the United States. "Once you brought it in the context of Iraq," Mr. Allawi said, "it fell flat on its face."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Back to our regular story:

The contract has been the subject of intense scrutiny after disclosures in 2003 that it had been awarded without competitive bidding. That produced criticism from Congressional Democrats and others that the company had benefited from its connection with Dick Cheney, who was Halliburton's chief executive before becoming vice president.

No bid, no effective review, audits that show gouging but still result in payment, and no real controls over how the money is being spent. I have to find a customer or a boss that will let me get away with that sort of business practice.

Later that year auditors began focusing on the fuel deliveries under the contract, finding that the fuel transportation costs that the company was charging the Army were in some cases nearly triple what others were charging to do the same job. But Kellogg Brown & Root, which has consistently maintained that its costs were justified, characterized the Army's decision as an official repudiation of those criticisms.

Oh, my God! Gouging at the gas pump... even in oil-rich Iraq!

"Once all the facts were fully examined, it is clear, and now confirmed, that KBR performed this work appropriately per the client's direction and within the contract terms," said Cathy Mann, a company spokeswoman, in a written statement on the decision. The company's charges, she said, "were deemed properly incurred."

What Mann is saying is that it is not that KBR has done anything wrong, it's that the contract is so bogus and faulty that there isn't anything that Haliburton or KBR could do to muck it up. Yep. That is the Republican leadership watching our tax dollars. But hey, what are friends of Dick Cheney and Dubya for if not to assure that we keep our "biggest and bestest" corproations working hard at ripping off the taxpayers.

Keep up the good work... BTW... How big is our deficit now?

Mutual Mistrust Anyone?

Another Day of Mutual Mistrust

"Mike McCurry, who was President Bill Clinton's press secretary a decade ago, is kicking himself to this day for ever allowing the White House briefings to be televised live.

"It was a huge error on my part," Mr. McCurry recalled the other day after watching a relentless White House press corps badger Scott McClellan, the current White House press secretary, about a hunting accident in which Vice President Dick Cheney shot a friend, Harry M. Whittington, and delayed telling the news media about it. "It has turned into a theater of the absurd."

The live briefings, held almost daily, do serve a purpose for both sides. They give the White House an everyday entree into the news cycle and let officials speak directly to the public. And they give reporters the chance to hold officials accountable and on the record (and help reporters get time on camera).

By its nature, the relationship between the White House and the press has historically held an inherent tension. And many say it has been eroding since the Vietnam War and Watergate, when reporters had reason to distrust everything the White House said and made a scandalous "gate" out of every murky act.

But today, those on both sides say, the relationship has deteriorated further, exacerbated by the live briefings.

"It's constantly getting worse," said Ari Fleischer, who preceded Mr. McClellan as Mr. Bush's spokesman. Perhaps surprisingly for a Bush defender, he attributed the soured relationship in part to what he said was a secretiveness within the White House."

So, the White House remains unprepared and caught off-guard. My grandfather used to tell me not to lie because it gets too hard to remember all the lies you are spinning at any given time. Perhaps if the truth were the primary focus of these briefings, then the White House wouldn't be caught so much off-balance, er... off-guard.