Gannon Debriefed

Finding The Foot Behind The Talon
Much is being made of the 'resignation' of Jeff Gannon, a faux-journalist suspected of being a conservative shill in the White House press briefing room and now also believed to have some ties to lifestyles that don't jibe with the party lines.

But what about Talon News? According to whois records, talonnews.com is owned by Endeavor Media Group in Houston TX -- a company with a PO Box and a fake phone number listing. When checking on endeavormediagroup.com in whois, the same info comes up -- but endeavormediagroup.com is a Forbidden domain. Also, googling "endeavor media group" gets you nothing. It's like this company doesn't exist.

And it didn't -- until Monday.

Endeavor Media Group, LLC (39068802O)
info@endeavormediagroup.com
P.O. Box 891354
Houston, TX 77289
US
Phone: 999-999-9999

Record expires on 07-Feb-2008
Record created on 07-Feb-2005
Database last updated on 07-Feb-2005

So what's the deal? Talon News changed ownership right around the time the Jeff Gannon controversy was about to boil over.

But wait, there's more.

Talon News' "#1 client" GOPUSA.com, is also, as of Monday, owned by Endeavor.

Domain Name: GOPUSA.COM Administrative Contact , Technical Contact : Endeavor Media Group, LLC (39068802O) info@endeavormediagroup.com P.O. Box 891354 Houston, TX 77289 US Phone: 999-999-9999 Record expires on 27-Sep-2007 Record created on 27-Sep-1999 Database last updated on 07-Feb-2005
How to get to the bottom of this? How about checking out the other site Talon seems buddy-buddy with, MensNewsDaily.com. They don't seem to be a part of the Endeavor/Jeff Gannon media empire, but they presumably have at least corresponded with someone pulling the strings.

GANNON COMING UP ON CNN

Minutes away, at 5PM EST, Gannon/Guckman will be on Wolf Blitzer Reports.

Looks like he may be on the RECEIVING end of softball questions, for a change . . .

This is a discussion about Lakoff's book that everyone is discussing and the message we need to articulate..

http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/research/wallack/levels

[snip]
"The power of the [right wing] extremists comes not from their numbers, which are relatively small, but from their ability to control the stories by which we answer three basic questions:
How will we prosper?
What will make us secure?
And how will we find meaning?
These are increasingly serious questions for a great many Americans...To gain a foothold in the discourse, progressives must come up with more holistic and compelling stories."

Sex, lies, pornography money to fund campaigns, lies, false reporters with questionable sexual web sites, lies, Rethuglican ethics, lies, politics, lies, family values, lies, religious values, lies, war based on falsehoods, lies, deaths of soldiers, lies, deaths of innocent civilians in shrubbie's war, lies, lies, lies....

Hel-l-o-o-o?!?!? Where are the neocon christian moralists with their outcry about all of this?!?!? Why aren't they screaming like raped apes over the lies and lack of ethics and morals in the current administration?!?!? Where is their shame over having a part in "electing" the pond scum occupying the White House?!?!? Wow.... all I hear is the pall of deathly silence....

Another rockridge institute article about how to define and win the abortion debate.
Lakoff nad others are discusssed

http://www.rockridgeinstitute.org/projects/reprod/littmanabortion

[snip]
This debate is not about "choice" or "life". It is not even about being "anti-abortion" or "pro-abortion". This debate is how we approach the issue of unintended pregnancy: Prevention or Punishment

'Gannon': 'It could happen to you'
http://www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2005/02/10whitehouserepor.html

Lautenberg Requests All Documents From White House Relating to Discredited "Journalist" James D. Guckert, A.K.A. Jeff Gannon
http://lautenberg.senate.gov/%7Elautenberg/press/2003/01/2005210903.html

Franken says no to run for Senate
http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S6198.html?cat=64

Posted by: Marc Trager at February 10, 2005 04:48 PM

The author of that is way behind..those whois records were changed yesterday...original records are found all over sites like DAILYKOS.COM .

Billmon: Gannon is a tax cheat!
http://dailykos.com/story/2005/2/10/161336/239

http://billmon.org/

JD Guckert, AKA Jeff Gannon, will grace the White House Press Corpse no more, reports Howard Kurtz of Washington Post:

Wow is Randi on Air America doing this guy over big time way to go Randy.
And all the thing you wanted to know, but were not told, about the 52 warnings given in the 6 mths before 9/11. and of the air controller who was put in charge the day previous to 9/11 happening

YOU ROCK RANDI

Kangaroo

Wolfie finishing royal wedding story, Gannon not up yet (priorities are priorities). He's teased the "CNN exclusive" first-time-on-television live interview with Gannon five times now.

That's okay. Let "Gannon" sweat a little longer . . .

Posted by: Bob Evans at February 10, 2005 05:40 PM

Oh puhhlease....they're going to be agreeing on everything. This is no interview. Wolf is such a stupid Repug.

Speedy,

Well, they've had enough rehearsal time to get it down pat!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

February 10, 2005
9/11 Report Cites Many Warnings About Hijackings
By ERIC LICHTBLAU

ASHINGTON, Feb. 9 - In the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations, according to a previously undisclosed report from the 9/11 commission.

But aviation officials were "lulled into a false sense of security," and "intelligence that indicated a real and growing threat leading up to 9/11 did not stimulate significant increases in security procedures," the commission report concluded.

The report discloses that the Federal Aviation Administration, despite being focused on risks of hijackings overseas, warned airports in the spring of 2001 that if "the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable."

The report takes the F.A.A. to task for failing to pursue domestic security measures that could conceivably have altered the events of Sept. 11, 2001, like toughening airport screening procedures for weapons or expanding the use of on-flight air marshals. The report, completed last August, said officials appeared more concerned with reducing airline congestion, lessening delays, and easing airlines' financial woes than deterring a terrorist attack.

The Bush administration has blocked the public release of the full, classified version of the report for more than five months, officials said, much to the frustration of former commission members who say it provides a critical understanding of the failures of the civil aviation system. The administration provided both the classified report and a declassified, 120-page version to the National Archives two weeks ago and, even with heavy redactions in some areas, the declassified version provides the firmest evidence to date about the warnings that aviation officials received concerning the threat of an attack on airliners and the failure to take steps to deter it.

Among other things, the report says that leaders of the F.A.A. received 52 intelligence reports from their security branch that mentioned Mr. bin Laden or Al Qaeda from April to Sept. 10, 2001. That represented half of all the intelligence summaries in that time.

Five of the intelligence reports specifically mentioned Al Qaeda's training or capability to conduct hijackings, the report said. Two mentioned suicide operations, although not connected to aviation, the report said.

A spokeswoman for the F.A.A., the agency that bears the brunt of the commission's criticism, said Wednesday that the agency was well aware of the threat posed by terrorists before Sept. 11 and took substantive steps to counter it, including the expanded use of explosives detection units.

"We had a lot of information about threats," said the spokeswoman, Laura J. Brown. "But we didn't have specific information about means or methods that would have enabled us to tailor any countermeasures."

She added: "After 9/11, the F.A..A. and the entire aviation community took bold steps to improve aviation security, such as fortifying cockpit doors on 6,000 airplanes, and those steps took hundreds of millions of dollars to implement."

The report, like previous commission documents, finds no evidence that the government had specific warning of a domestic attack and says that the aviation industry considered the hijacking threat to be more worrisome overseas.

"The fact that the civil aviation system seems to have been lulled into a false sense of security is striking not only because of what happened on 9/11 but also in light of the intelligence assessments, including those conducted by the F.A.A.'s own security branch, that raised alarms about the growing terrorist threat to civil aviation throughout the 1990's and into the new century," the report said.

In its previous findings, including a final report last July that became a best-selling book, the 9/11 commission detailed the harrowing events aboard the four hijacked flights that crashed on Sept. 11 and the communications problems between civil aviation and military officials that hampered the response. But the new report goes further in revealing the scope and depth of intelligence collected by federal aviation officials about the threat of a terrorist attack.

The F.A.A. "had indeed considered the possibility that terrorists would hijack a plane and use it as a weapon," and in 2001 it distributed a CD-ROM presentation to airlines and airports that cited the possibility of a suicide hijacking, the report said. Previous commission documents have quoted the CD's reassurance that "fortunately, we have no indication that any group is currently thinking in that direction."

Aviation officials amassed so much information about the growing threat posed by terrorists that they conducted classified briefings in mid-2001 for security officials at 19 of the nation's busiest airports to warn of the threat posed in particular by Mr. bin Laden, the report said.

Still, the 9/11 commission concluded that aviation officials did not direct adequate resources or attention to the problem.

"Throughout 2001, the senior leadership of the F.A.A. was focused on congestion and delays within the system and the ever-present issue of safety, but they were not as focused on security," the report said.

The F.A.A. did not see a need to increase the air marshal ranks because hijackings were seen as an overseas threat, and one aviation official told the commission said that airlines did not want to give up revenues by providing free seats to marshals.

The F.A.A. also made no concerted effort to expand their list of terror suspects, which included a dozen names on Sept. 11, the report said. The former head of the F.A.A.'s civil aviation security branch said he was not aware of the government's main watch list, called Tipoff, which included the names of two hijackers who were living in the San Diego area, the report said.

Nor was there evidence that a senior F.A.A. working group on security had ever met in 2001 to discuss "the high threat period that summer," the report said.

Jane F. Garvey, the F.A.A. administrator at the time, told the commission "that she was aware of the heightened threat during the summer of 2001," the report said. But several other senior agency officials "were basically unaware of the threat," as were senior airline operations officials and veteran pilots, the report said.

The classified version of the commission report quotes extensively from circulars prepared by the F.A.A. about the threat of terrorism, but many of those references have been blacked out in the declassified version, officials said.

Several former commissioners and staff members said they were upset and disappointed by the administration's refusal to release the full report publicly.

"Our intention was to make as much information available to the public as soon as possible," said Richard Ben-Veniste, a former Sept. 11 commission member

Kangaroo

Wolfie with Gannon was even more of a softball interview than expected. Seemed like one-third of it was on Gannon's claims of being "harassed" by people who didn't like his politics. When he said it affected his "family," you might think little children were involved. But no, his mother and brother had gotten some phone calls.

When Gannon said he used a pseudonym only because "Jeff Gannon" is easier to pronounce and to remember than his real name, James Gluckman, Wolf accepted that as if it was credible.

Make that James GUCKERT. Darn, maybe that IS hard to remember! lol

Guckert/Gannon, potato/patahto--what makes something fraud, is the intent to gain something one would not otherwise have if the facts and truth were known. Like White House press corpse pass.

And here's my favorite part coming up, God willing. Scoot McClellan said (in the link to the briefing)that JD was never issued a hard pass.

Now, how many industrious member of the Left Blogostan are out there combing and enlarging footage of every pressroom briefing out there for the period in which we were treated to appearences by good old JD Guckert himself? All of them, God willing. And then it's roast Scotty time.

And after that, then comes the subpoenas about Plame. And for those of you that wondered up thread, Talon is the astroturf like organization of Bobby Eberle. Google him and you will find Rove, Slime Boats, etc at the bottom is my guess. I think the immediate nexus is to the Bugman, DeLay.

Hey, wanna puke?

Rice charms in first diplomatic dance
The new secretary of state makes her world debut

By Andrea Mitchell
Correspondent
NBC News

LUXEMBOURG - Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice’s charm offensive was on display this week with students at a music conservatory in Paris.

“Helen, you played beautifully,” she told one pianist. “I don’t have a chance to play very much anymore, but I try to play at least every Sunday afternoon.”

Rice has been playing piano since she was 3, prompting an invitation to return from the mayor of Paris.

“Next time you play for Paris,” said Bertrand Delanoë.

-snip-

Europe's hard-bitten press treated her like a rock star, praising her elegance, her polish and despite her Ph.D. in political science, even calling her exchange with the German chancellor “coquettish.”

How does that make her feel?

“I don't think much about it,” says Rice. “I will do what I do. I'm a package. I'm who I am and that includes being female.”

European leaders say her unique power comes from her unusually close, almost family-like relationship with the president.

“We love her,” said President Bush at her swearing-in ceremony last month. “I don't know if you're supposed to say that about the secretary of state.”

Posted by: Marc Trager at February 10, 2005 08:25 PM
And she loves him...like a husba...uh, president.

To the surprise of no one, the saga of former White House correspondent James D. Guckert, also known as Jeff Gannon, took center stage at a briefing conducted by White House spokesman Scott McClellan today.

Gannon/Guckert quit his post at an obscure Web site, Talon News, Tuesday night after bloggers exposed the fact that he had been working under an alias and had possible links to sex-oriented Web sites. Questions have emerged about how and why the White House allowed the reporter to attend briefings and even ask President Bush a very friendly question at his recent press conference. (See previous E&P Online story.)

McClellan admitted today that he knew that "Jeff Gannon" was not the reporter's real name. Yet at numerous televised press briefings he addressed him as "Jeff."

Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) today asked McClellan to immediately release all documents related to what the White House knew about "Gannon," and when they knew it.

From the transcript of today’s briefing:

Q: Jeff Gannon. How did he get a White House pass, or what kind of credentials did he have?

McClellan: Just like anyone else who comes to the White House.

Q: Hard pass?

McClellan: No, he had never applied for a hard pass. He had a daily pass. I think he's been coming for --

Q: Was he coming for --

McClellan: Hang on. I think he's been coming for more than two years now.

Q: Under what name?

McClellan: Sorry?

Q: Under what name?

McClellan: Well, you have to get cleared. You have to -- just like anybody else that comes to the White House, you have to have your full name, your Social Security number, and your birth date. So you have to be cleared just like anybody else.

Q: So he was being cleared under James Guckert, or whatever his name is?

McClellan: My understanding, yes.

Q: OK, and how did he get picked to get a question asked at the last news conference?

McClellan: He didn't. The president didn't have a list. The president didn't -- he was in the briefing room. There are assigned seats in the briefing room. We didn't do any assigning of seats, and the president worked his way through the rows, and called on people as he came to them. He doesn't know who he is.

Q: Were you aware that he had another name?

McClellan: Was I aware? I had heard that. I had heard that, yes, recently.

Q: But did you know during all this time that he really wasn't Jeff Gannon?

McClellan: I heard at some point, yes -- previously.

Q: As Press Secretary, what do you think about this whole --

McClellan: Well, like I said -- what do I think about it? Well, let me explain a few things. First, as the press secretary, I don't think it's the role of the press secretary to get into picking or choosing who gets press credentials. Also, I don't think it's the role of the press secretary to get into being a media critic, and I think there are very good reasons for that. I've never inserted myself into the process. He, like anyone else, showed that he was representing a news organization that published regularly, and so he was cleared two years ago to receive daily passes, just like many others are. The issue comes up -- it becomes, in this day and age, when you have a changing media, it's not an easy issue to decide or try to pick and choose who is a journalist. And there -- it gets into the issue of advocacy journalism. Where do you draw the line? There are a number of people who cross that line in the briefing room.

And, as far as I'm concerned, I would welcome the White House Correspondents Association, if they have any concerns or issues that they want to bring to my attention, they know my door is open and I'll be glad to discuss these issues with them. I have an open dialogue with the Correspondents Association. No one's ever brought such an issue to my attention, in my -- during my time as being press secretary. And you all cover the briefing room on a regular basis. You know that there are a number of people in that room that express their points of view, and there are people in that room that represent traditional media, they represent talk radio, they represent -- they're columnists, and they represent online news organizations.

Q: Was the White House aware at all -- was the White House aware -- was the White House aware at all about the online Web sites that he was linked to?

McClellan: No. This has only come to my attention through the news reports, just a few reporters calling in.

My understanding was, when he started coming to the White House about two years ago, the staff asked to see that it -- that he represented a news organization that published regularly. And they showed that, so he was cleared and has been cleared ever since based on that time.

And this is just now something that's come to my attention more recently because it's been an issue raised in some media reports.

KERRY ON CSPAN NOW

Excerpts from Monty Pythons "Holy Grail"

Dennis: What I object to is you automatically treat me like an inferior.
King Arthur: Well I am king.
Dennis: Oh, king eh? Very nice. And how'd you get that, eh? By exploiting the workers. By hanging on to outdated imperialist dogma which perpetuates the economic and social differences in our society.

Good summary:

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/2/10/83242/3251

Seattle P-I also covered it very nicely today - don't have link but go to http://www.seattlepi.com

Lost Halliburton Nuclear Material Found
By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - A Halliburton Co. shipment of radioactive material that landed in New York in October was lost en route to Texas, and was not found until Wednesday, when it turned up in Boston.
[SNIP]

NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said the agency was not told about the missing material until Tuesday. Depending on the material, government rules require notification either immediately or within 30 days.

"The focus through today was on trying to find the material," Sheehan said. "We're going to be pressing them on why the notification was not more timely."

MORE: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=542&ncid=718&e=6&u=/ap/20050211/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/missing_radioactive_material

This is Chuck in Baku:

Sorry for being off-topic, except insofar as the thread is about disinformation, but I just read this and I find it amazing:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021005A.shtml

The skinny is that our President blocked the release of part of the 9/11 commission report five months ago, which means October, 2004, as in October surprise October, which included in part proof that the FAA, for one, definitely considered that the risk of an event like 9/11. Remember how the NSA and others from the administration testified back then to the effect of “who would’ve thunk they’d do something like that.” Again, either gross incompetence or lying under oath, and definitely using the old “National Security” dodge to suppress information for political reasons.

The article is from the 10-Feb-05 NYT, and here are some excerpts:

“In the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some of which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations, according to a previously undisclosed report from the 9/11 commission…..

“The report discloses that the Federal Aviation Administration, despite being focused on risks of hijackings overseas, warned airports in the spring of 2001 that if ‘the intent of the hijacker is not to exchange hostages for prisoners, but to commit suicide in a spectacular explosion, a domestic hijacking would probably be preferable…..’”

“Among other things, the report says that leaders of the F.A.A. received 52 intelligence reports from their security branch that mentioned Mr. bin Laden or Al Qaeda from April to Sept. 10, 2001. That represented half of all the intelligence summaries in that time.

“Five of the intelligence reports specifically mentioned Al Qaeda's training or capability to conduct hijackings, the report said. Two mentioned suicide operations, although not connected to aviation, the report said….”

“Several former commissioners and staff members said they were upset and disappointed by the administration's refusal to release the full report publicly.

“’Our intention was to make as much information available to the public as soon as possible,’ said Richard Ben-Veniste, a former Sept. 11 commission member.”

And for me, here is the kicker:

“The Bush administration has blocked the public release of the full, classified version of the report for more than five months, officials said, much to the frustration of former commission members who say it provides a critical understanding of the failures of the civil aviation system….”

This seems quite important to me.

Chuck in Baku

Chuck in Baku again:

Oops! Just realized Rossiann already posted this article. Serves me right for not reading the thread prior to posting! Anyway, I still find this to be a very disturbing abuse of executive power -- sort of like a CEO and CFO in a publically traded coporation colluding to sit on information that would cause their stock options until they had divested themselves of it. Gee, I think I see a pattern here....

Chuck in Baku

Chuck in Baku:

Ooops again. In the last post, "colluding to sit on information that would cause their stock options until..." should read:

"colluding to sit on information that would cause their stock options TO LOSE SIGNIFICANT VALUE until...."

Sorry!

Chuck in Baku

Any insomnia sufferers out there?
Read the Repug guide to reforming SS; all 103
pages.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/docs/gop.socsec.strategy.memo.pdf
[snip]
Key Recommendations…

“Personalization” not “privatization”: Personalization suggests increased personal
ownership and control. Privatization connotes the total corporate takeover of Social Security;
this is inaccurate and thoroughly turns off listeners, who are very concerned about corporate
wrongdoing.

Talk in simple language: Your audience doesn’t understand financial jargon. Phrases such
as “cash flow deficits” and “actuarial imbalance” don’t normally crop up in conversation; avoid using them.

Keep the numbers small: Your audience doesn’t know how trillions and billions differ.

They know these numbers are large, but not how large nor how many billions make a trillion.
Boil numbers down to “your family’s share.”

Also avoid percentages; your audience will try
to calculate them in their head—no easy task while listening to a speech—and many will do
it incorrectly.

Acknowledge risks: Many of your listeners will not have a lot of financial education or
investment experience, but they know that markets have risk—and nothing is guaranteed.
They believe investments can grow over time, but they also know they can lose their
investments. They don’t trust someone who tells them differently.

Say it the way they can hear it: Your audience will reject some turns of phrase because of
the connotations and associations. The responses are not universal, but they are much less
personal than you might imagine.
House Republican Conference Deborah Pryce, Chairman January 2005

Chuck in Baku again signing off; just wanted to leave with the observation that the Fish and Wildlife coerced science thing (http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021005J.shtml) that many of you have alluded to over the past few threads seems part and parcel of this entire disinformation campaign. There oughta be a law... Come to think of it, there probably is.

Chuck in Baku

C'mon folks. Let's not blow this thing out of proportion.

So what if Jeff Gannon/Gluckert was moonlighting as a shill for the Bush White House when he wasn't thinking of lucrative ways to exploit the "HotMilitaryStud.com", "MilitaryEscorts.com" and "MilitaryEscortsM4M.com" domain names?

It's not like he's a hypocrite or something. After all, whether you're pimping for Bush or pimping for real, it's pretty much the same thing. As Cole Porter would have put it, it's just love for sale.

Well this statement is clear as mud... I think he puts the "rum" in Rumsfeld.

U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld made a surprise visit to Iraq today, telling U.S. soldiers that it will be up to Iraqis to defeat the insurgency in their nation. "You have shown that America is in fact a land of liberators, not a land of occupiers," Rumsfeld told U.S. troops in Mosul. Meanwhile, gunmen attacked a pair of bakeries in Baghdad today, killing nine workers, Iraqi police said.

Britain Accused Over CIA's Secret Torture Flights
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0210-11.htm

US Scientists Say They Are Told to Alter Findings
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0210-12.htm

Germany Rejects Call for Rumsfeld War Crimes Probe
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0210-08.htm

Center for Constitutional Rights Blasts Ruling of German Prosecutor Refusing to Hear War Crimes Case Against Rumsfeld
http://www.commondreams.org/news2005/0210-06.htm

The Battle of the (Bush) Bulge: Why Did the 'NYT' Kill Its Story?
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0210-06.htm

Norman Solomon | What They Really Mean. . .
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0210-20.htm

The Republican Dictionary:
Bush's personal retirement accounts=private retirement accounts=US government loans=US government borrowing=Chinese government lending=Chinese Communist Party loans.
http://www.thenation.com/edcut/index.mhtml?bid=7&pid=2182

Anybody else find yet another trip by Rummy to Iraq weird??? Is that a ploy to keep the troops loyal to BushCo??? This is what I wrote to a relative a few days ago after I got one of those chain mail things about the military:

I'm weaning myself away from the "glorification of the military" (one of the fourteen signs of fascism - and we are now a fascist nation, thanks to the Patriot Act and other idiotic pieces of legislation since then) and the current brand of "bandwagon patriotism" that has suffused this country since 9/11, and I'm now drawing personal lines of demarcation about our military personnel. I'm proud as hell of the fact that I have relatives and friends who have been in the military, or who are currently in the military. They've served with distinction and proudly, and I'm very grateful for that (and just glad all of my relatives made it back from Viet Nam without injury or death, even if some friends I knew in high school weren't so lucky and came back dead - what a waste of perfectly good lives.....)

A while back when one of the local TV news anchors blathered on with a distinctly dreamy tone of voice about "our soldiers in Iraq fighting for our freedom" - I wrote a lengthly email to remind them that the US military in Iraq are not there fighting for "our freedom" - your freedom or my freedom. They are in Iraq killing innocent people and civilians for the sake of BushCo and cronies who want to be able to control the oil in Iraq, and they were not invited there by the people of Iraq. They are there for the sake of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, PNAC (which is clearly a plan to take over the world - Hitler, who was supported by our current president's grandfather, would have been proud) and their corporate buddies who want to take over and corporatize Iraq for their own benefit (oil, other corporations who want to grab up land and build other kinds of businesses as well), and our soldiers are not in Iraq for the benefit of the people of Iraq. The fact that our soldiers are there at all has caused a rise in the number of terrorists in the world because from their perspective they are being patriotic to their own country and want freedom from the tyranny of invaders into their country. Clearly, Bush and his evil minions have never read Julius Caesar.... he couldn't win against the ancient Celts and their guerilla tactics either without first crushing and destroying them and their civilization (as did Rome's military generals and invading armies after him). When Rome fell because of their political corruption and pulled their military out of the countries they occupied, it ushered in the Dark Ages and the rise of a corrupt Christianity....

And then there's that other little bit of blind obedience by our military people to a corrupt commander-in-chief who approved torture and abuse which has led to the prison abuses in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib and elsewhere in the world because people have been tracking those little plane that takes prisoners of to other countries to torture them in other countries where laws are far more lax than the laws on our books (which have been broken left and right) in this country about how to treat prisoners. Holding people without due process, capturing and holding prisoners of war without due process and then torturing them on top of that, whether the people are doing the torture are US military personnel or "private security officers" (and at least two firms who hire "private security officers" - aka mercenaries!) are owned by Halliburton, Dick Cheney's old company from whom he is still earning monies. A "few bad apples?" I don't think it's as "few" as the BushCo administration wants us to believe. To have that horrid news come out through the tightly controlled military complex and the tightly controlled and censored press means that it's more widespread than we can possibly know right now. They are a blight on all of us, thanks to people like Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Gonzales, Rice et al. I don't know how how those people who profess to be our "leaders" can criticize other countries for their "human rights violations" with a straight face without choking to death on their own hypocritical words!!! We're just as bad as those other countries when our own military personnel and mercenaries hired by the US commit such horrendous acts against people. Then there's that one general who recently commented that it was "fun to kill people" - and he wasn't even reprimanded or punished! Wow... some "Christian values" from the likes of Bush, his administration, and military "leaders" like Boykin (who's clearly nuttier than a fruitcake, and I don't know why he wasn't drummed out of the military for psychological reasons years ago!)!!!

The people I currently admire the most are those who are leaving the military for reasons of conscience; they don't want to kill people.... especially in an illegal, unjustified, immoral, and unethical war that Bush started for the sake of controlling the oil in Iraq. Who knows where Bush will decide he next needs to invade another country for the sake of controlling oil? Clearly, Iran is probably next, if he decides to reinstate the draft - or any other countries with any amount of oil beneath the surface. There is a finite amount of oil beneath the ground now, the world's oil supplies have peaked, and what really should be happening is a huge investment in alternative energy sources.... but BushCo and cohorts will bleed people for every last cent they have and profit well from all of us while they can. Those who hold the control of the oil and hold the purse strings for those corporations are now ruling the world, even if most people haven't quite figured that sad fact out yet.

So, while I'm glad there are kids coming home from Iraq alive and well, others are not going to be so fortunate, and we're going to see a large number of them suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, not to mention those who have lost limbs in Iraq, thanks to BushCo sending them to fight in Iraq (so he and his cronies can control the oil there), and I'm not unmindful that a great many of them are guard and reserve troops who enlisted to stay on our own soil and protect us here in this country if we are attacked on our own soil and we've been left short-staffed here at home on our own soil. I'm supporting any efforts to bring our people home where they belong so they don't have to fight an unjust, illegal, immoral, and unethical war because of the greedy whim of a commander-in-chief who wants to play king of the hill in a pissing contest.

I suspect few people know about some of the laws that are on the books as part of legislation passed in the dead of night, and made legal by more of BushCo's secret executive orders, likely some we've yet to hear about, and they'd be horrified if they ever paid attention to more than reality TV... or maybe not, since they are still walking around under the delusion that they are "free." We're one contrived terrorist act away from BushCo declaring martial law and a complete suspension of all of our rights (and, of course, suspending elections in 2008 so he could declare himself dictator...).... And, given the fact that the person who supposedly ordered the terrorist act that then got Bush his extra powers granted to him in the first place, and then turn around and abuse his rights as a leader appointed by the Supreme Court in 2001, has never been found, and Bush has admitted he never thinks about him any longer (but he never points out how close his family is to the terrorist's family by business and personal ties, I notice!!!), I am wondering how much he knew in advance of the attack, given the fact he ignored the August PDB.... etc.... Likely by the time the truth of the matter is sorted out, all of us will be long dead, given the fact that his first Executive Order in 2001 signed his first week in office sealed his father's and vice-president's papers (and, remember, they had a lot to do with the Nixon years and Iran-Contra), and his own presidential papers. I don't know if we will have access to those papers unless we get a president in office who will sign an Executive Order to unseal those very papers that could show what a traitor our current president (and his father and vice-president and their cohorts) are to our own country.....

So, I'm only proud of our military with grave reservations.....

Let 'er rip, Nonny!!!

Poll Shows Drop in Bush's Job Approval

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20050211/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_ap_poll

Too bad it's just me polling my friends.
Just kidding.

This guy lost 3 debates & the election.
He lost 2 elections.
I just heard Bev Harris the other night & I
can never believe these were fair elections.

I'm surprised they let polls be released where he'd below 50%.

And meanwhile the bloggers and the blogmeisters and the spinners and the spinmeisters are all busy trying to divert our attention by "debriefing" Gannon/Guckert/whoever and by "airing his dirty laundry in public". Meanwhile the more important stories of who's really playing hide-the-sausage with whom back behind the barn all all being given, er, shorts shrift instead. I'd be tempted to start calling the whole affair "UndieGate", except for I'm afraid that might draw our old JK blogbuddy 'underbear' out of out the woodwork with his boxers in a bunch, and then he'd end up giving the whole administration a mass wedgie just on general principles... which would be a real jock to the system as a whole, but could also bring an entirely new level of meaning to the term "legal briefs", I suppose...

*fnord*,
Otter

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A newly released memo warned the White House at the start of the Bush administration that al Qaeda represented a threat throughout the Islamic world, a warning that critics said went unheeded by President Bush until the September 11, 2001, attacks.

The memo dated January 25, 2001 -- five days after Bush took office -- was an essential feature of last year's hearings into intelligence failures before the attacks on New York and Washington. A copy of the document was posted on the National Security Archive Web site Thursday.

The memo, from former counterterrorism chief Richard Clarke to then-national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, had been described during the hearings but its full contents had not been disclosed.

Clarke, a holdover from the Clinton administration, had requested an immediate meeting of top national security officials as soon as possible after Bush took office to discuss combating al Qaeda. He described the network as a threat with broad reach.

"Al Qaeda affects centrally our policies on Pakistan, Afghanistan, Central Asia, North Africa and the GCC (Gulf Arab states). Leaders in Jordan and Saudi Arabia see al Qaeda as a direct threat to them," Clarke wrote.

"The strength of the network of organizations limits the scope of support friendly Arab regimes can give to a range of U.S. policies, including Iraq policy and the (Israeli-Palestinian) Peace Process. We would make a major error if we underestimated the challenge al Qaeda poses."

The memo also warned of overestimating the stability of moderate regional allies threatened by al Qaeda.

It recommended that the new administration urgently discuss the al Qaeda network, including the magnitude of the threat it posed and strategy for dealing with it.

The document was declassified April 7, 2004, one day before Rice's testimony before the September 11 commission. It was released recently by the National Security Council to the National Security Archive -- a private library of declassified U.S. documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act.

The meeting on al Qaeda requested by Clarke did not take place until September 4, 2001.

DiAnne,

That AP/Ipsos poll shows a striking difference in Bush's approval rating from the Gallup results released only three days ago.

AP/Ipsos has 54% disapprove, 45% approve

Gallup had 57% approve (up from 51% three weeks earlier, with increase attributed to Iraq election).

I think both polls were done around the same time, and it's not an apples-to-apples comparison. It really makes me curious to see how things have changed now, after new info is out on the Medicare prescription drug costs and more on pre-9/11 intel ignored.

Ladies and germs, another message from the home of the terminally dense...

How concerned are you about North Korea's stated nuclear ambitions?

CNN QuickVote

Very 48% 54671 votes

Somewhat 32% 36413 votes

Not at all 20% 23006 votes

Total: 114090 votes

Great article by Eric Alterman............

THE LIBERAL MEDIA by Eric Alterman
Better Red Than Dead?

The United States government is currently run by a group of people for whom verifiable truth holds no particular privilege over ideologically inspired nonsense. For members of the mainstream media, trying to maintain a sense of self-importance and solemnity and to keep the wing nuts from crowing for more scalps, this requires a series of stratagems to keep up the scripted charade, no matter how foolish it makes them look or feel while doing so.

snip...........

But the unhappy fact is that almost everything this Administration tries to sell to Americans is snake oil, and the mere act of reporting it without comment implicates the media in the fundamental dishonesty that is this President's modus operandi. When he says "freedom," he means the freedom of the United States and its allies to jail and torture anyone they choose. When he says "liberty," he means the liberty of other governments to profess to share the alleged aims of US foreign policy and then--like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Uzbekistan and Egypt--jail and silence all critics without inconvenient criticism from the United States. (If you play the game right, you can even provide weapons to anti-American terrorists and fund anti-American and anti-Semitic propaganda on behalf of the terrorists, all the while remaining a close friend of Bush & Co.)

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20050228&s=alterman

Posted by: Marc Trager at February 11, 2005 08:19 AM

Only too glad to let 'er rip!!! :-)

But seriously, we still have an all-volunteer military (for the moment). The one interview of people who had gone to Canada and were asking for political asylum on 60 Minutes that struck me the most was the one where it was mentioned that new recruits are told they do not have to follow illegal, immoral, or unethical orders, per the Nuremberg judgement. To say "I was only following orders" is not a justifiable defense for committing atrocities or for torturing people.

What would happen if the people in our military decided they could not, in good conscience, continue to follow orders and kill innocent children, women, and men in Iraq and stopped "following orders" as given by the commander-in-chief?!?

Puts a whole different light on why Rummy has been in Iraq recently.... I suspect he is trying to keep the troops loyal to BushCo, even if they are trying to cut military benefits at the same time.....

Marjorie Cohn | Lady Liberty Under Attack
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/021105X.shtml

Senate Approves Measure to Curb Big Class Actions
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/11/politics/11class.html?th
"The measure does not affect pending cases."
"Mr. Bush issued a statement praising the vote, his first legislative victory of his second term."
"In the vote on Thursday, 18 Democrats joined 53 Republicans and the lone Senate independent, James M. Jeffords of Vermont, in supporting the measure. Democrats cast all 26 dissenting votes. Two Republicans, Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and John Sununu of New Hampshire, did not vote."

Massachusetts Democrats Object to Stem Cell Research Ban
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/11/national/11stem.html?th

Torture, American Style
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/11/opinion/11herbert.html?th
"Jettisoning the rule of law to permit such acts of evil as kidnapping and torture is not a defensible policy for a civilized nation. It's wrong. And nothing good can come from it."

GETTING THE PURPLE FINGER
Naomi Klein, The Nation
Near-sighted election observers think the Iraqi people have finally sent America those long-awaited flowers and candies, when Iraq's voters just gave them the (purple) finger.
http://www.alternet.org/waroniraq/21235/

The media is to Bush what Monica was to Bill