Ohio Kids Get Civics Lesson

Rice needs an earful about more than softwood
Vancouver Sun

Condoleezza Rice in Ottawa Tuesday.
Re: PM keeps pressure on softwood, Oct. 25

There is a particular irony in the timing of Condoleezza Rice's visit to Canada during United Nations Disarmament Week, Oct. 24-28. She represents the country that has, in recent years, done more than any other to undermine the United Nations structure and especially its efforts for nuclear disarmament. The U.S. holds more than 10,000 nuclear weapons, targeted and ready to launch at a moment's warning, and refuses to undertake verifiable steps toward nuclear disarmament. The U.S. is even attempting to develop new smaller nuclear bombs and most recently has threatened to use these weapons of mass destruction pre-emptively.

Two weeks ago, the U.S. pressured Canada and other countries to withdraw their support for an important draft UN resolution on nuclear disarmament. The Canadian government, previously a long time champion of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, is now reluctant to speak and vote in a forthright manner for the abolition of nuclear weapons. Yet Canadians have overwhelmingly supported nuclear disarmament in polls over the years.

Did Martin take this opportunity to remind Rice how clearly Canadians feel about this matter?

Charles King
Board member
Physicians for Global Survival (Canada)
Crescent Beach

Karen,

Beautiful header. Thanks so much for helping us to share in your experiences there. You are making a difference!

Our friend, David Swanson from afterdowningstreet.org is planning on getting arrested today by lying down in protest of the war in front of the White House. You can read his diary here...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/25/232035/12#70

Karen,

How sweet.

I'm glad you were able to share democracy with them.

It reminds me about one heartwarming thing that happened to me during my canvassing.

I usually get the ole' door in the face when they hear which party I am representing. Yet, I always try to tell those of the opposite party that we are talking about an issue that really might unite us. Some listen; some don't.

However, this one evening, I ran into a person of opposite party and opposite view points on this issue (Raising the minimum wage) and we had a short discussion.

This time, as I was walking away (freezing my you know what off too!) this gentleman called out to me, "Even though I disagree with your position thank you for what you're doing."

...that gave me warm fuzzies all over. ;)

Poll: Few doubt wrongdoing in CIA leak
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/25/cia.leak/

(CNN) -- Only one in 10 Americans said they believe Bush administration officials did nothing illegal or unethical in connection with the leaking of a CIA operative's identity, according to a national poll released Tuesday.

Thirty-nine percent said some administration officials acted illegally in the matter, in which the identity of Valerie Plame, a CIA operative, was revealed.

The same percentage of respondents in the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll said administration officials acted unethically, but did nothing illegal.

The poll was split nearly evenly on what respondents thought of Bush officials' ethical standards -- 51 percent saying they were excellent or good and 48 percent saying they were not good or poor.

The figures represent a marked shift from a 2002 survey in which nearly three-quarters said the standards were excellent or good and only 23 percent said they were fair or poor.

The latest poll questioned 1,008 adults October 21-23 and has a sampling error of plus or minus 5 percentage points.

Federal law makes it a crime to deliberately reveal the identity of a covert CIA operative, and special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald is heading a probe into the matter. (Fitzgerald profile)

With the grand jury investigating the leak set to expire Friday, FBI agents interviewed a Washington neighbor of Plame for a second time.

The agents asked Marc Lefkowitz on Monday night whether he knew about Plame's CIA work before her identity was leaked in the media, and Lefkowitz told agents he did not, according to his wife, Elise Lefkowitz.

Lefkowitz said agents first questioned whether the couple was aware of Plame's CIA work in an interview several months ago.

Members of Fitzgerald's team also talked to a former White House official to gather last-minute information about the role of Karl Rove, President Bush's top political adviser, a source familiar with the conversation told CNN.

Plame and her husband, retired State Department career diplomat Joseph Wilson, have accused Bush administration officials of deliberately leaking her identity to the media to retaliate against Wilson after he published an opinion piece in The New York Times.

The July 2003 article cast doubt on a key assertion in the Bush administration's arguments for war with Iraq -- that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium for a suspected nuclear weapons program in Africa.

Wilson, who was acting ambassador to Iraq before the 1991 Persian Gulf War, said the CIA sent him to Niger, in central Africa, to investigate the uranium claim in February 2002 and that he found no evidence such a transaction occurred and it was unlikely it could have. (Full story)

Days after Wilson's article was published, Plame's identity was exposed in a piece by syndicated columnist and longtime CNN contributor Robert Novak.

Rove has testified before the Fitzgerald grand jury that he believes it was I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, who first told him that Plame worked for the CIA and had a role in sending her husband to Africa, according to a source familiar with Rove's testimony.

New York Times reporter Judith Miller spent 85 days in jail for contempt before finally agreeing last month to tell grand jurors that Libby told her Wilson's wife may have worked at the CIA, although she said Libby did not identify Plame by name or describe her as a covert agent or operative.

Libby has also testified before the grand jury.
Report links Cheney to case
The New York Times reported Tuesday that notes in Fitzgerald's possession suggest that Libby first heard of the CIA officer from Cheney himself. (Full story)

But the newspaper reported that the notes do not indicate that Cheney or Libby knew Plame was an undercover operative.

The Times said its sources in the story were lawyers involved in the case.

The notes show that George Tenet, then the CIA director, gave the information to Cheney in response to questions the vice president posed about Wilson, the Times reported.

Cheney said in September 2003 he had seen no report from Wilson after his assignment in Africa.

"I don't know Joe Wilson. I've never met Joe Wilson. I don't know who sent Joe Wilson. He never submitted a report that I ever saw when he came back," he told NBC.

Cheney's office had no comment, and the White House would neither confirm or deny the Times report.

"The policy of this White House has been to carry out the direction of the president, which is to cooperate fully with the special prosecutor," said White House press secretary Scott McClellan, who was peppered with questions about the report at his daily briefing.

"There's a lot of speculation that is going on right now. There are many facts that are not known. The work of the special prosecutor continues and we look forward to him successfully concluding his investigation," he said.

McClellan said he had not sought any clarification about Cheney's involvement from the vice president or his office and bristled when a reporter asked if Cheney always tells the truth to the American people, dismissing the query as "ridiculous."

In 2003, McClellan used the same word to deny that either Rove or Libby had been involved in the leak.

The Justice Department opened a criminal probe in September 2003 at the request of the CIA.

Fitzgerald, the U.S. attorney in Chicago, Illinois, was named special prosecutor at the end of 2003 after then-Attorney General John Ashcroft recused himself from the probe.

As the grand jury term expires, Fitzgerald could ask for an extension of the grand jury's service, request indictments or end the probe without bringing charges.

That's an amazing story! I'm sure that made an incredible difference in their lives! =)

Source: No announcement in CIA leak probe today
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/26/cia.leak/index.html

(CNN) -- The federal grand jury investigating the leak of a CIA operative's identity could hand up charges as early as today, but Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald is not expected to make any public announcements Wednesday, one source with knowledge of the probe told CNN....

amizz- What I would LIKE to believe is that Rove, at the very least, will go to federal prison for perjury, and that the sentence will end his career as a political consultant. What I DO believe is that Rove will plead guilty of perjury, spend a few months (or even weeks) in jail, and will then leave prison, write a best-selling book about his experiences, and return to what seems to be his lifelong occupation- helping the Bush family cheat on tests. I think he will still be advising W a year, two years, and even 3 years from now. He may not have a White House office space, but he'll still be on the family payroll in some form or the other.
It's a little depressing, and now CNN says there will be no indictments today. I'm not sure what that means- whether it means there will be no indictments today, or that they believe there will be no indictments.

Please, please, say it ain't so........

Liinda-- see link @ 11:47 AM

There will not be announcements today, but the jury is voting on indictments

aimzz- thanks for that link. The way it was announced on CNN really didn't give any details.

Posted by: Linda Enterkin at October 26, 2005 11:51 AM

Well, I'm really bad at names, but wasn't there a terrorist who was charged with the NYC bombings and directed his terror groups from jail?

THAT will be Rove!

Hi Everyone,

Please read and recommend this diary.

http://dailykos.com/story/2005/10/26/12518/309

Here is an article to share with someone not already in the choir.

Here is the crime in outing of CIA agent

http://denverpost.com/opinion/ci_3147655

Here is the crime in outing of CIA agent
By Gary Hart
Denver Post Guest Commentary

It is now fashionable among columnists supporting the Bush administration, New York Times journalist Judith Miller, Robert Novak and the increasing network of senior administration officials implicated in the Valerie Plame Wilson outing to say, "So what? Where's the crime?"

The federal statute making it a criminal penalty to knowingly divulge the identity of anyone working undercover for the Central Intelligence Agency was not enacted in a vacuum. In the early 1970s, in part as a result of the radicalization of individuals and groups over the Vietnam War, a former CIA employee named Philip Agee wrote a book revealing the identities of several dozen CIA employees, many under deep cover and some including agency station chiefs in foreign capitals.

Many of the countries in which those CIA employees were working themselves had extremely radical and violent elements stirred to hatred over their opposition to America's conduct in the Vietnam War. So, by revealing their identities, Agee had knowingly and willingly placed these American citizens at risk. Violent consequences were predictable.

Richard Welch, a brilliant Harvard-educated classicist, had been stationed in Greece as CIA station chief only a few months before he was murdered, by a radical Greek terrorist organization called the 17th of November, in the doorway of his house in Athens on Dec. 23, 1975. Had Agee not divulged his name, there is every reason to believe that Welch would be alive today after decades of loyal service to his country.

Largely as a result of Agee's perfidy and Welch's unnecessary death, the Intelligence Identities Protection Act (IIPA) of 1982 was enacted, making it a felony to knowingly divulge the identity of a covert CIA operative. It carries penalties of 10 years in prison and a $50,000 fine for each offense. There are those who dismiss the crime by saying, "Oh, Wilson only had a desk job." That is not a defense under this felony statute. It is for the CIA, not Karl Rove or Robert Novak, to determine who requires identity protection and who does not.

The political irony of all this is that conservative elements in America have always proclaimed themselves more concerned than anyone else with national security, the sanctity of classified information, protection of sources, support for our intelligence and military services, and so on. At radical times in our past, irresponsible leftist groups thought it was their duty to try to reveal the names of CIA agents. Now, under a conservative administration, it is these conservative national security champions who are saying, with regard to the "outing" of a CIA undercover

officer, "Where's the crime?"
There is further irony in the fact that now the premier intelligence agency of the United States, the CIA, is in utter disarray. Morale is desperately low. Many of the best career officers are leaving. As the source of unbiased professional intelligence, the CIA has been diminished and pushed aside by the Department of Defense. This at a time when it is critical to national security to have the best possible intelligence to protect us from terrorism.

I served on the first Senate Intelligence Oversight Committee in the late 1970s and have continued to be a strong believer in and supporter of the CIA. I deplore those who want to diminish it, politicize it, or require it to produce bogus intelligence it would not otherwise produce simply to fit some preconceived political or ideological agenda. In almost every case where the CIA has malfunctioned, it did so under pressure from one political administration or another.

So, there's the crime. To casually and willfully endanger the life of an undercover CIA agent is a felony. You either believe in taking the laws of the United States seriously or you do not. Citizens - even highly placed ones - do not get to pick and choose which laws they will obey and which they will not. Miller and her publisher may think she's a hero, but I don't. It is well established that there is no First Amendment protection for a journalist or anyone else to withhold evidence of a crime.

There is one final irony to this story. On Christmas Eve in 1975, I got a call at my home from the director of the CIA, William Colby. He asked if I would intervene with the White House to obtain presidential approval to have Welch buried at Arlington National Cemetery, a hero fallen in service to his country. I quickly called President Ford's chief of staff on Colby's behalf and made the request. Within two hours, the president had agreed to sign the order permitting Welch to be buried at Arlington.

The chief of staff's name was Richard Cheney.

From previous thread:

Posted by: Matthew Carnicelli at October 26, 2005 09:09 AM The Letter to Daschle. Thanks for that Matthew - you made me feel better. And in some respects, guilty. I didn't do enough.

Your second post was great, too. Thanks for your consistent wisdom and insight.

I urge others to go back to the previous thread and read Matthew's two posts if you haven't.

One forgotten fallout of this war is the number of dead Iraqis. They (the administration and their supporters) keep telling us, "We've saved them from Sadam's torture chambers and murdering sprees. And we're giving them Democracy."

While I can sympathize that the original 'intent' on supporter's part to get rid of Sadam, I'm sure one of the by products they have yet to grasp is that the incompetency of this pResident, Rummy, Cheney, and the rest of the hoodlums in his administration has led to a bigger fallout for the Iraqis than they had under Sadam.

Yes, Sadam was bad. AND maybe someone out there could say, "Pre-emptive war based on nuclear proliferation is ok." But in this specific case, when you combine the lies of this administration, the treason, the incompetency...well...it's a utter horrible outright shame how we've decimated this country.

Please read, this and tell me we did the right thing!

http://tinyurl.com/drr3b

Posted by: aimzzz at October 26, 2005 12:00 PM

Could the indictments be filed very late today without the public's knowledge, with an announcement tomorrow?

IT IS SO GOOD TO SEE CINDY SHEEHAN SMILING AGAIN!

I recently got Faux news, and have never really forced myself to sit and watch it to see what it is like.

Last night, after a long day, I sat down and flipped to it. Some pundit that looked like a brunette version of the Ken doll was tearing Cindy to shreds. He said she is playing with MoveOn.org (oh, my.....)and tore her apart. I
was too tired to get his name, but, believe me, I am going to find it, even though it means sitting through another one of his tirades. And, he is going to get a letter from me.

What I have noticed from Faux news is this big thing: Bill O'Reilly and this man last night are filled with hate, contempt, bitterness, and pent up rage. Gee, glory hallelujah. What could cause men to talk about a mother of a dead soldier like that?

IMHO:

Big Daddy and $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

John Kerry calls for beginning phased troop withdrawal
by Noisy Democrat [Subscribe]
Wed Oct 26, 2005 at 09:51:56 AM PDT
John Kerry is making a major speech at Georgetown in about 20 minutes. CSPAN is supposed to be taping it; no word yet on when/if it will air. And it is indeed major. The text of remarks as prepared is below. The short version is, for those who've been waiting for Kerry to say he wouldn't have given President Bush the power to do what he did if he'd known Bush was selling a pack of lies, waiting for Kerry to call for a timetable, or waiting for Kerry to call for beginning the withdrawal of troops -- wait no longer. But he has a lot more to say than that. Text below the cut.

Noisy Democrat's diary :: ::

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/26/125156/02

"

Excellent thread head.

I have three young children and know that they will be left holding the bag for all of Bushco's mistakes. It is heartening to see younger Americans who are determined to not let our country continue on this disasterous path.

Oh...and according to recent leaks, Fitz may be indicting in Libby and Rove for a Civil Rights violation as a result of their smearing campaign against Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson's good name.

The end result, Joe and Valerie who can no longer get jobs in their fields may have a huge winable lawsuit against this cabel.

FURTHERMORE, in my opinion, it also opens the door for Clarke and others who have been smeared by this evil administration and the propaganda media to turn and also sue for civil rights violation. Afterall, they all were hit with the smear.

AND...given that Republicans and neoCONS are cranking up the smear machine on Fitzgerald himself, that charge is a DIRECT hit on their current activities.

Link:

http://www.tompaine.com/articles/20051026/fitzgerald_civil_rights_charges.php

Grandjury adjourns for the day.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/26/AR2005102601354.html

I realize this type of 'scorecard' opens the door to a similar thing against Dems, but frankly I don't care!!!

The list of crimes and corruption in this list is appalling and I want NO REPRESENTATION from the likes of these people! No matter the party!

Read it and cringe!

http://tinyurl.com/7bjrh

Aides to Be Indicted, Probe to Continue
By Richard Sale
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/102605Y.shtml

A request for those using the tinyurl or similar url shrinking sites...

Please tell us which site you're linking to. There are some sites that I prefer not to frequent. With the site name blinded/replaced by the alternate link, it's becomes harder to avoid those sites.

Thanks.

Thanks for the good work everyone.

Great pictures, Karen and CAYorty! And good civic lesson indeed.

Last night, after a long day, I sat down and flipped to it. Some pundit that looked like a brunette version of the Ken doll was tearing Cindy to shreds. He said she is playing with MoveOn.org (oh, my.....)and tore her apart. I

Truth and everyone:

This one is easy to refute--MoveOn is NOT endorsing Cindy's acts of nonviolent civil disobedience.

How do we know this?

We had dinner with Cindy last night, and we KNOW MoveOn is not coordinating with her.

We were there--they were NOT.

Such a phenomenal post, I had to share it here - it's from the Huffington Post:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2005/10/26/i-charge-jane-fonda-with_n_9559.html

About one third of the way down. A response to the WTimes article about Jane Fonda.

MOTHERS FOR ANSWERS
SOME CALL IT TREASON

Since you brought the topic up........ how much oil stock does Jane Fonda own these days? Probably a lot less than Zion, I'll bet.

The sheer size of the oil industry's profit mountain makes it a tempting target. Together, the 29 major oil and gas firms in the Standard & Poor's 500 stock index are expected to earn $96 billion this year, up from $68 billion last year and $43 billion in 2003………..

Some industry analysts have predicted combined profits of more than $20 billion by the five largest oil companies during the quarter (that means 3 whole months, folks)
London-based BP on Tuesday reported a 34 percent increase in profit to $6.53 billion, ………….BP third quarter net profit, excluding gains from the value of its inventories, increased by 16 percent

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-oilmoney26oct26,0,586400.story?coll=la-home-business

Yup, you read that right. Expected to earn $96 billion this year, up from $68 billion last year and $43 billion in 2003. 50 percent profit PER YEAR. During two years of WAR.

Profit has doubled in 2, let me repeat that, 2 years for Big Oil under the Bush administration where the entire cabinet are former oil executives and George Bush counts among his friends and biggest contributors every single oil executive in the state of Texas. And we have invaded a country floating on a sea of oil. Coincidentally, right?

And his Vice President ran Halliburton, which is now making more profit that any other American company from BOTH the Iraq war and Hurricane Katrina. A lot of it from no-bid contracts and uncontested overcharging. They don’t call it Vice for nothing, do they?

The Bush administration is the first administration in modern American history to allow oil profiteering during wartime. Until George Bush came into office, to profiteer off the American public during wartime was not only considered a criminal offence, it was also considered treason. Those convicted did prison time for it.

Now it’s merely considered part of the average Republican portfolio. You don’t have to be Michael Moore to ask how many oil executives have children in the war, do you?

If you bother reading the whole linked article, you will notice that it does not mention that we are at war and in times of national disaster. In fact the word Iraq does not even appear in this article. So far Iraq, where we have no WMD explanation for being, and that’s not counting Afghanistan, has cost America 300 billion dollars, and that’s just so far. Katrina, Rita and Wilma are going to come in at about the same price.

So far the entire Big Oil contribution to the past two years can be summed up in the idea that the Oil companies have responded to the war effort by patriotically deciding to rape America with a derrick. Oil prices went stratospheric during the same days that New Orleans sank. All the government did was count their personal gains from this .

Let me remind you how much of this is off-shore and not even taxable.

And this does not even include the role the Arabs have played in the creation of this situation. Our allies in war, the Saudis. How have they contributed to the Iraq war effort?
By picking clean American pockets. How much has Saudi Arabia, where Al Quadea was created and still gets most of it s financial support, made off this versus how much have they put into this war?

Not to mention, and we never do seem to see this mentioned, Kuwait. Kuwaitis are still citizens of Kuwait and not bowing house-servants of the Iraqi military class solely due to our saving their camel-bottomed butts. How much has Kuwaiti seen it to help us during this war. And why exactly did we get involved in the first place?

To put the cherry on this whole obscene sundae, the American military announces the 2000th death of an American soldier on exactly the same day as the oil profit numbers are being made public. You might as well announce the death of the GOP in the next breath. It is now just a matter of how much harm in the way of parting shots doomed Republican incumbents getting all of 29 percent public poll approval (and that’s before what is going to happen to the oil situation this winter) can inflict until November 2006.

Why are you reading this coming from me? I am merely a middle-aged nobody writing from some small town in the middle of nowhere.

Where are the investigative reporters in all this? Why isn’t the NY Times as interested in the idea that refining costs are being used as profit CYA as it was in yellow cake from Niger. Much of this profit will be from heating oil, which is by and large unrefined.

Why isn’t the Washington Post [or the Washington Times?] asking why profiteering in wartime is suddenly not a treasonable offense?

Have any of the newspapers figured out how much of the average American income, particularly the Northeast this winter is going as profits into Big Oil pockets?

Why aren’t reporters for Cable News telling all those folks that don’t read the papers what the connections are between this administration and Big Oil?

Who is following the money? And who is it finally going to be that points out the place where that money has gone and how close to Washington that place may be?

And most importantly why aren’t these parasites being prosecuted for profiteering during wartime?

When George Bush calls up on the American people to make sacrifices, what sacrifices is he expecting to see from the American owners of Big Oil?

Gandolina@hotmail.com
Posted by: gala on October 26, 2005 at 12:10pm

terrific post Amy... thanks for sharing it with us. Don't think I could say it any better than this poster did.

Posted by: Karen at October 26, 2005 03:42 PM

Karen,

I am glad you got to have dinner with Cindy. Of course I know she isn't IN with MoveOn.

It was what the pundit was saying.

My point is that it is SHOCKING, shocking, I tell you, to see and hear someone with that much venom directing that kind of poison toward a mother who has lost a child in a war she doesn't believe ever had to be fought, and is exercising her right of free speech to step forward and say so. We all know Cindy is motivated from the heart. She doesn't want others to suffer the loss she has.

I suppose that pundit does have the right to say anything he wants about her. But what on earth motivates him and men like him and Bill O'Reilly to speak with what, in my opinion, is hate?

When I get that guys' name, he will hear from me.
All you have to do is look in Cindy's eyes and know the woman has been to hell and back.

Cindy Sheehan IS what this is all about.

And hopefully, the chord she has struck with us will resonate into the far reaches of people's psyche's across this land.

She embodies who we are inside. Life giving, life affirming, nurturing.

This is a war between the principles this country was founded on and the empire the neocons want to permanently make of it. Principles of pursuit of happiness, growth, and man evolving to a state where he seeks to be healthy and happy and wants the same for his neighbors - against an empirical state where the rich grow richer and the poor, well, they just exist to serve the rich, then die.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Don't think for a moment that those in power would stop at letting people go without health care and groceries on the table, and jacking up their prescription drug fees. It is my personal opinion (not that of the DCP) that these people have the proponents to become abusive, agressive, and brutal dictators.

I hope to God we see something hopeful come out of Fitzgerald's investigation.

new thread...

and boy has Karen been busy...

Truth--well it also shows they are incapabale of processing new information; something we have ample evidence of.

Cindy WAS getting some support logistically from MoveOn, but they are noticeably absent from the ventures in front of the White House.

So what, you might say?

Just that if any of these clowns took the time to actually find out if what they say is true, they would be surprised. They are not good at looking at the facts. John Kerry today said we have a government of "factual relativists". Try that one on 'em.

What a great story, Karen! Congratulations on having dinner with Cindy! It must have been an amazing experience!