Bush was like Hitler, says weapons inspector

A former United Nations weapons inspector has compared the invasion of Iraq to Hitler's invasion of Poland.

He told the Berliner Zeitung newspaper that 130 Americans had died "for a lie", adding: "I see no difference between the invasion of Iraq and the invasion of Poland in 1939."

Both invasions were based on what he said was an artificial argument of self defence. President George W Bush had used the September 11 attacks as Hitler used the 1933 burning of the Reichstag to repress domestic dissidents. more

Report: Richard Perle Told Investors How They Could Profit From War In Iraq Weeks Before It Started!

The Bush administration is a real class act, huh? Richard Perle, who recently resigned as chairman of Donald Rumsfeld’s Defence Policy Board, briefed an investment seminar on ways to profit from conflicts in Iraq and North Korea just weeks after he received a top-secret government briefing on possible war in the two countries. Perle also serves on the board of several defense contractors who most definitely profited from Bush's illegal Iraqi war.

Perle attended a Defense Intelligence Agency briefing in February and three weeks later participated in a Goldman Sachs conference call in which he advised investors in a talk titled Implications of an Imminent War: Iraq Now. North Korea Next?

A financial advisor who participated in the conference call told reporters that Perle offered "advice on how to cash if war broke out in Iraq and/or North Korea."

One of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's closest advisers, Perle was a vocal advocate of going to war against Iraq. He resigned as chairman of the Defense Policy Board on March 27 after it was reported he had worked as a consultant to bankrupt telecommunications company Global Crossing Ltd., which was trying to get Pentagon approval to be sold to Asian investors.

In offering his resignation, Perle, 61, denied any wrongdoing and said he didn't want questions about his outside interests to be a distraction to Rumsfeld. He remained a member of the board.

"The guiding principle here is that you do not give advice in the Defense Policy Board on any particular matter in which you have an interest," he said at the time. "And I don't do that. I haven't done that."

A Congressional House Judiciary Committee instigated investigation is looming with far reaching implications. Perle was, after all, a close advisor to Donald Rumsfeld. more

Newsmax: Graham Eyeing Evidence That Bush Blew 9/11

I don't usually quote Newsmax because it's such an ass kisser for the reTHUGlican party. Even when it does post something potentially damaging to Republicans it either spins it into being Bill Clinton's fault or is set up tomprovide talking points for Republicans to defend the action. In this case, Newsmax does both with an interesting story on George W. Bush's complicity in the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and Presidential Candidate Bob Graham's knowledge of it.

Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bob Graham is reportedly sitting on damaging evidence that the Bush administration could have prevented the Sept. 11 attacks - but he hasn't released the information yet because it's classified.

"I think Bob Graham has a smoking pistol on the Bush administration," Congressional Quarterly's Craig Crawford told WABC Radio's John Batchelor and Paul Alexander late Tuesday.

Crawford explained that Graham's mystery evidence has to do with "their failures, particularly intelligence failures, before 9/11."

In recent weeks Sen. Graham, the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, has charged repeatedly that Bush bungled the war on terrorism. But the ex-Florida governor has never publicly suggested that he thought the president had left America vulnerable to the 9/11 attacks. (Slayer's note: That was Newsmax's first talking point for republicans. They're saying that when this story breaks wide open, point out that Bush never left America vulnerable to the 9/11 attacks which is exactly what happened with Bush's intelligence failures. This is a set-up to blame it on Clinton.)

Crawford, who's been covering the Florida Democrat's presidential run, said that Graham obtained the Bush-9/11 evidence while serving as the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

"The problem is that what [Graham] knows - and he knows some very damaging stuff about the Bush administration's failures before 9/11 to prevent 9/11 - he can't talk about because it's classified," he explained.

Another reason for Graham's silence: Republicans would likely complain that Graham has abused his position on the Intelligence Committee by turning it into a tool for opposition research. (Slayer's note: Here is another talking point for republicans. When the story breaks, try to spin it into Graham abusing his power so people will forget the information of Bush's failures. We all now which offense is far and away the worse, but the fascist GOP will tell you otherwise.)

Still, Graham has been publicly hinting at what he knows without going into detail, said the CQ reporter. He quoted a recent speech in which the senator claimed, "I know first hand, as former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, how little this administration has done to provide real security at home while it has directed its attention away from the war on terror abroad."

Crawford said that the presidential hopeful is trying to figure out a way to make the 9/11 evidence against Bush public without violating the secrecy rules on the Intelligence Committee.

"He's got something on Bush. He just can't figure out how to use it," he explained.

If Graham does indeed have evidence implicating the administration in 9/11-related negligence, it would be doubly ironic for the Bush White House, which has gone out of its way not to point fingers at the Clinton administration for its role in leaving America vulnerable to a 9/11-style attack. (Slayer's note: Republican talking point number 3. This, of course, is a lie. The Clinton administration had no role in leaving America vulnerable to a 9/11-style attack and there is no evidence to support the assertion that it did. If you really want to debate former Presidents' complicity in the matter, let's talk Reagan and Bush the first. )

Even an acknowledgement last year by ex-President Clinton that he turned down a deal for Osama bin Laden's extradition to the U.S. prompted only yawns from the Bush political operation.

(Slayer's note: This is a typical republican distortion of the facts. The events surrounding a "deal for Osama bin Laden's extradition to the U.S." is well known. Unfortunately, the facts completely destroy the spin conservatives try to put on the story. In fact, I'd be willing to bet there isn't a republican reading this who can successfully debate me on this.

In regards to the "deal," republicans are intentionally misrepresenting an article that appeared in the Washington Post on Oct. 3, 2001, on this topic. In particular, "the Post reported that during secret negotiations in 1996 between American officials and Sudan defense minister Elfatih Erwa, "The [Khartoum] government was prepared to place [bin Laden] in custody and hand him over. Erwa said Sudan would consider any legitimate proffer of criminal charges against the accused terrorist. Saudi Arabia, he said, was the most logical destination." The Post then detailed efforts by the White House and the State Department to induce the Saudis to accept custody of bin Laden, which the authorities in Saudi Arabia adamantly refused.

Consider the qualifying line above: Sudan would consider any legitimate proffer of criminal charges against the accused terrorist. This is saying the only way Sudan would give up bin Laden is if someone provided an legitimate legal reason to do so. In 1996 - when the "deal" was offered - the attacks on the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (1998) and the attack on the U.S.S. Cole (2000) has not yet occurred. The US had no evidence that bin Laden was behind any attacks prior to 1996 and therefore could not legally take custody of bin Laden.

Nowhere does the Post's carefully worded story state that Sudan agreed to "hand bin Laden over to the United States" -- because that never happened.

Further, Sudan had ulterior motives. They only promised to cooperate against terrorism only if the United States ended economic sanctions imposed to punish their genocidal campaign of murder and enslavement against black Christians.

There have been other alleged foreign "offers" to arrest or track bin Laden, but there is little substance to those stories beyond mere speculation.

Of course, we now see how difficult it is to capture bin Laden. After Reagan and Bush the first trained him, Bush the first couldn't reel them in, Clinton missed him by mere hours, and now George W. Bush has given up on catching him. Parts of this were quoted from the Joe Conason article "Don't Blame Clinton."

Wal-Mart Pulls Racy Magazines from Store Shelves

First Sheryl Crow had to go. Then Barbie's pregnant friend was shunned. Now, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. the world's biggest retailer, is axing three men's magazines known for cover photos of scantily-clad models.

Wal-Mart has pulled Maxim and Stuff magazines, published by Dennis Publishing, and Emap Metro LLC's FHM magazine from its shelves, saying some customers were uncomfortable with their covers.

"Wal-Mart has been the most notorious for refusing to carry, for example, music with warning labels," said Marjorie Heins, director of the Free Expression Policy Project based in New York. "Some of these large chains seem to have their marketing decisions driven by ideological rather than truly financial motivations." more

A mean-spirited America: Today, I fear my own government more than I do terrorists (This is a must read!)

These days, a sense of apprehension and foreboding lurks in the back of my head and the pit of my stomach. It’s a gut-wrenching reminder that something very bad has happened and is about to happen anew. It is an anticipation of the next insult and injury in an America that has been defined under the Bush administration by a profound meanness of spirit.

The evidence of this overwhelming meanness of spirit is everywhere, abroad and at home. Even the administration’s efforts to justify the war in Iraq as one of liberation and declare victory cannot mask the human costs to American troops and their families. How many thousands of Iraqis are dead? Where are the ridiculously named “weapons of mass destruction” that Bush used to justify this invasion? Witness the looting of priceless antiquities, kitsch and cash from Iraqi museums and Saddam Hussein’s palaces and homes, allowed and participated in not only by Iraqis but members of the American armed forces and their “embedfellows,” the media...

Yet to question this war and its aftermath is characterized as at worst treason and at best anti-American cynicism. And woe unto those who criticize Halliburton, Kellogg Brown & Root and the rest of the corporate sponsors of the Bush administration as they line up at the trough of government contracts to rebuild Iraq and control its oil. Now, the armed forces in Iraq have turned to shooting Iraqi demonstrators, the very people they supposedly came to “liberate” with democracy...

Today, I live in an America that makes my stomach hurt and fills me with terror. A nation run by greedy, frightened, violent bullies. It is time to take our country back before it is too late. more

DJs Suspended for Playing Dixie Chicks

Country station KKCS has suspended two disc jockeys for playing the Dixie Chicks, violating a ban imposed after the group criticized President Bush.

Lead singer Natalie Maines told a British newspaper she was "ashamed that the president of the United States is from Texas."

"We pulled their music two months ago, and it's been a difficult decision because how can you ignore the hottest group in country music," station manager Jerry Grant said.

He said there has been discussion about whether to reinstate the music, but the DJs, Dave Moore and Jeff Singer, became impatient.

"They made it very clear that they support wholeheartedly the troops, the military. But they also support the right of free speech," Grant said.

The station has received a couple of hundred calls and 75 percent favored playing the music. more

This is what the so-called Dixie Chicks Backlash has done for their record sales



Their latest CD rises back to #2 this week on Billboard and their concerts are selling out. Free Speech - a wonderful thing!

Hillary Backs Bush Into A Corner...

Senator Clinton Calls for Extension of Jobless Benefits

Senator Hillary Clinton is calling on President Bush and Congress to extend unemployment insurance for America's workers.

At a New York City press conference Sunday, she called for swift passage of the "Unemployment Benefits Extension Act of 2003" which would provide relief to more than 4 (m) million workers hurt by the poor economy.

Clinton noted that at the end of the month, more than 2 (m) million Americans... will begin to lose their unemployment benefits. And she said more than one (m) million Americans... have already exhausted their benefits.

The legislation would extend unemployment benefits for another six months, including 13 weeks of benefits for those who have already exhausted their benefits. more

Of course, if pResident Bush's tax cut for the rich goes through, there won't be any money for additional unemployment benefits which puts him in a precarious situation now that Senator Clinton has put this choice before him: Either give the tax breaks to his rich buddies or take care of the millions of Americans out of work because of his economic policies. He can't do both. And the choice he makes will prove to be very telling as to where his piorities are.

The nation's unemployment rate swelled to 6 percent in April, returning to an eight-year high as employers slashed payrolls even deeper. The ailing economy has lost a half million jobs in three months.

Seasonally unadjusted, the unemployment rate is 10.4 percent!

Dick Cheney's Former Company, Halliburton, Has Ties To Terrorism Congressman Charges

Click here to read Representative Waxman's letter to Donald Rumsfeld. (requires adobe acrobat reader)

The Clinton Wars Part 2: Ken Starr's media minions

Starr had believed that Clinton would be gone within days of the story about Monica Lewinsky breaking. He was incensed that the president's popularity had increased rather than collapsed...

Starr established an atmosphere that was contemptuous of the president. ... Prosecutors... in charge regarded Clinton as morally unfit to hold his office. For them anything to get at Clinton was fair game. "There was a general animosity toward Clinton," I was told. "This was fueled by frustration by not getting anywhere, dead ends on other investigations. So we had to see who he is screwing." Their moral indignation and Republican politics could not be disentangled from their prosecutorial work. "I saw decisions made on moral grounds that had nothing to do with criminal grounds," Dash told me. "They believed that someone was a bad person, a sinful person, who ought to be punished for it. They distorted their judgment. Ken allowed his personal concepts of morality to interfere with the role of a prosecutor."

According to Sam Dash, Starr "could have rounded up" his initial investigation within two years of his appointment, "by 1996 or 1997. On all the issues involving the White House, fairly early he had enough information to conclude." Dash carefully reviewed the prosecution memos in each and every case: Whitewater, Susan McDougal, Webster Hubbell, the White House Travel Office, the FBI files. "They had nothing."

"Starr didn't see the difference between sin and crime. His judgments were distorted." Once on the sex trail, Starr sentenced himself to presenting sex from a certain angle through the peephole. Without proof of anything else, it became Starr's only way of making Clinton's position foul. It is the easiest and basest pornographic technique to depict sex -- any sex, even between the happiest of married couples -- as sordid by using graphic detail. Microscopic, clinical documentation removes the human element as it distances and alienates the viewer (or voyeur). Starr used this method to excite and repel simultaneously. Though he did not himself question a single witness before the grand jury, he personally dictated the compilation of sexual question upon sexual question.

Sex had been a label to explain a cluster of ideas and values that had upset Clinton's enemies for decades. He had always been a screen on which were projected conservative feelings about the 1960s, the counterculture, and race. Through it all, sex had been a tracer, a code. Clinton had been accused of miscegenation -- an ancient and recurrent theme in racist Southern politics -- from the start of his career. In politics, sex is rarely just about sex. The prudish and pedantic Starr was setting off cultural depth charges. more

Preorder "The Clinton Wars" Today!




out... (short update today...)

Evidence that this war was a sham mounts...

US: 'Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction'

Right about now, the Bush regime is sweating. They wasted all this time, money, and lives on a gamble... and lost!

The Bush administration has admitted that Saddam Hussein probably had no weapons of mass destruction.
Senior officials in the Bush administration have admitted that they would be 'amazed' if weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were found in Iraq.

According to administration sources, Saddam shut down and destroyed large parts of his WMD programmes before the invasion of Iraq.

Ironically, the claims came as US President George Bush yesterday repeatedly justified the war as necessary to remove Iraq's chemical and biological arms which posed a direct threat to America.

Bush claimed: 'Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We will find them.'

The comments from within the administration will add further weight to attacks on the Blair government by Labour backbenchers that there is no 'smoking gun' and that the war against Iraq -- which centred on claims that Saddam was a risk to Britain, America and the Middle East because of unconventional weapons -- was unjustified. more

and then there is this..,

Doubts grow over Iraq 'smoking gun'

Saddam Hussein appears to have shut down or destroyed large parts of his unconventional weapons programmes before the war in Iraq, a senior Bush administration official who has been closely involved in the quest to purge Iraq of weapons of mass destruction said this week.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said he would be "amazed if we found weapons-grade plutonium or uranium" and it was unlikely large volumes of biological or chemical material would be discovered. He suggested that the sanctions and UN inspections probably prompted Mr Hussein to dispose of much of his stockpile. more

... even former intelligence agents are speaking out against the sham our unelected fraud pulled... From a letter to George W. Bush...

Not Worth the Paper It's Written On? Intelligence Fiasco

MEMORANDUM FOR: The President

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

SUBJECT: Intelligence Fiasco

We write to express deep concern over the growing mistrust and cynicism with which many, including veteran intelligence professionals inside and outside our movement, regard the intelligence cited by you and your chief advisers to justify the war against Iraq. The controversy over intelligence on Iraq has deep roots, going back a decade. It came to a head over recent months as intelligence was said to be playing a key role in support of your administrationa's decision to make war on Iraq. And the controversy has now become acute, since you have been backed into the untenable position of assuming the former role of Saddam Hussein in refusing to cooperate with UN inspectors. (Chief UN nuclear inspector Mohamed ElBaradei noted earlier this week, "We have years of experience and know every scientist worth interviewing.") The implications not only for US credibility abroad but also for the future of US intelligence are immense. They need to be addressed without delay.

Prominent pundits (and, quite probably, some of your own advisers) are now saying it does not matter whether so-called "weapons of mass destruction" are ever found in Iraq. Don't let them fool you. It matters a great deal. The Wall Street Journal had it right in its page-one lead article on April 8:

Officials Debate Involving the UN in Verification: American forces in Iraq are rapidly confronting two other tasks (besides hunting down Saddam Hussein) of enormous importance: finding any weapons of mass destruction and convincing the world the finds are real. The weapons search is a critical one for the Bush administration, which went to war charging that the Iraqi leader had hidden huge amounts of chemical and biological weapons and could pass them on to terrorists. If the US doesn't make any undisputed discoveries of forbidden weapons, the failure will feed already-widespread skepticism abroad about the motives for going to war."

The failure to find weapons of mass destruction six weeks after US and UK forces invaded Iraq suggests either that such weapons are simply not there, or that those eventually found there will not be in sufficient quantity or capability to support your repeated claim that Iraq posed a grave threat to our countrya's security. Your opposition to inviting UN inspectors into Iraq feeds the suspicion that you wish to avoid independent verification; some even suggest that your administration wishes to preserve the option of "planting" such weapons to be "discovered" later. Sen. Carl Levin recently warned that, if some are found "Many people around the world will think we planted those weapons, unless the UN inspectors are there with us." more

Woes For Dubyah, or, 'I Wanna Be Just Like My Daddy!'

If history is a lesson, President Bush's re-election bid has already been ambushed by rising unemployment, weak economic growth and the bear market.
"Unless the economy stages some sort of miracle comeback, the outlook for the president is grim indeed," said Donald Straszheim, head of independent research boutique Straszheim Global Advisors.

According Straszheim's research, which goes back 40 years, no incumbent president or his party has been returned to office if jobs growth was under 3 percent in the third and fourth years of his term. So with unemployment at 6 percent and headed higher, a dramatic reversal before the 2004 election is unlikely.

With the dismal economic picture overshadowing the U.S. victory in Iraq, it's natural to compare Bush to his father, whose jobless rate cost him re-election, despite success in the first Persian Gulf War.

A better comparison might be to Herbert Hoover, who presided over the Great Depression, suggested Lawrence Mishel, president of the Economic Policy Institute think tank.

Bush is on his way to becoming the first president since Hoover to lead an actual decline in employment, said Mishel. He estimates the economy would have to add 140,000 jobs a month to make up for more than the 2 million lost since Bush took office. (From The NY Post) more

Dumbass Move Of The Week: U.S. Hires Christian Extremists to Produce Arabic News

The U.S. government this week launched its Arabic language satellite TV news station for mostly Muslim Iraq. It is being produced in a studio – Grace Digital Media – controlled by fundamentalist Christians who are rabidly pro-Israel. That's grace as in "by the grace of God."

Grace News Network is "dedicated to transmitting the evidence of God's presence in the world today."

"Grace News Network will be reporting the current secular news, along with aggressive proclamations that will 'change the news' to reflect the Kingdom of God and its purposes," GNN proclaims. more

Can you say "Crusades?"

The Clinton Wars...

Clinton: "You know there's nothing wrong that Hillary and I did in Whitewater."
Senator Alan Simpson, Republican from Wyoming: "Of course, we all know there's nothing there. It was just politics. And it just got out of hand."

He began his second term with talk of national healing. But Chief Justice Rehnquist knew what the president could expect: "Good luck. You'll need it." Part 1 of an explosive new White House memoir.

About two weeks before Clinton's second inauguration the president asked me to come over to the White House. It was a Sunday night. Clinton was dressed in jeans, sneakers, and a sweater with an American flag stitched across its front. He led me to the family kitchen, in a part of the residence I had never seen. It was unlike the large White House kitchen on the ground floor, with its long steel counters and huge refrigerators and sinks, where presidential meals, including state dinners, are prepared. This kitchen was indistinguishable from any kitchen in an ordinary suburban house: Formica surfaces, chairs around a small table, a range, wood cabinets. Clinton set out mugs, boiled some water, and made tea.

Now we had a chance to discuss his inaugural address. I suggested to the president that he use the occasion to deliver a valedictory to the 20th century. He would be the president presiding at the turn of the century. He had campaigned on millennial themes, and he should continue to develop them...

We reviewed the campaign and how it had ended: his frantic but failed efforts in its closing days to help Democrats win the Congress. Clinton wasn't angry, just disappointed, not particularly by his own result, but by the Democrats' lacking the majority. He still had to maneuver his way through a Republican Congress to reach his goals. But his demeanor was of one who felt far more secure and knowledgeable about wielding his power than he had in 1992.

Clinton was frustrated but almost philosophical about the pseudoscandals. He knew that the Republicans knew they had been ginned up for political effect -- and the Republicans knew that he knew that they knew. He related a conversation he had had with Senator Alan Simpson, the Republican from Wyoming, who was retiring.

"You know there's nothing wrong that Hillary and I did in Whitewater," Clinton told him.

"Of course," Simpson replied. "We all know there's nothing there. It was just politics. And it just got out of hand." more

Preorder "The Clinton Wars" Today!

Clinton & Dole 60 Minutes Debate: Clinton Wins... Again!

SENATOR DOLE: Does Hollywood still think Ozzy Osbourne is funny, now that he's shipped his underage son off to drug rehab?

America is awash in reality TV. And the reality is it's debasing and degrading. Mr. President, don't your showbiz pals realize the consequences? They package dysfunctional people like the Osbournes, giggle at the coarseness and the crimes, and sink lower for higher ratings.

For eight years you treated Hollywood like your own piggy bank. Now, how about joining me in demanding a little responsibility? Ask those entertainment executives who wrote you those big, big checks: Isn't there some way to reach the most viewers without appealing to the worst in viewers? Reality exacts a price. Sadly, from Ozzy's son today. And maybe other kids tomorrow. President Clinton, how low can things go?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Senator, that's a great example of un-reality TV. I've never watched “The Osbournes,” but 10 years ago I did challenge the entertainment industry to take violence and what's harmful to kids out of their programming.

I pushed for the first TV ratings system and the V chip to give parents more control over what their kids watched. Reality TV makes money because adults watch it. Fox, the network full of conservative Republicans, has reality shows and you haven't criticized them.

As for kids and drugs, the Republican budget gives a tax cut to you and me paid for by cutting $100 million from the Safe and Drug Free School Program and the Drug Enforcement Administration -- and worst of all by kicking half a million kids out of after-school programs which we know keeps them away from drugs.

The administration's budget will hurt our effort to keep kids drug free a lot more than “The Osbournes.” That's reality.

SENATOR DOLE: You say reality TV makes money. (Rightwing Slayer's note: huh? Clinton didn't say that) So what? Is that all that matters to you? What about the cost? You know this isn't about federal programs. It's about real people, parents who are afraid to turn on the TV. Mr. President, how can you put a price on decency?

PRESIDENT CLINTON: I can't, but you Republicans do in your budget. How decent is kicking kids out of after school programs? At least parents can use the V chip to protect their kids from shows they shouldn't see. At least the Osbournes put their son in rehab. You Republicans are addicted to unfair tax cuts. You should put your budget in rehab, too.

Prominent Republican Pleads Guilty To Production Of Child Pornography.

More Republican Hypocrisy; Richard Anthony Delgaudio once said former President Bill Clinton was "a lawbreaker and a terrible example to our nation's young people"

A prominent Republican fund-raiser who once said former President Bill Clinton was "a lawbreaker and a terrible example to our nation's young people" pleaded guilty yesterday in Baltimore Circuit Court to production of child pornography. Richard Anthony Delgaudio, who was sentenced to two years' probation before judgment, admitted to taking lewd photographs of a 16-year-old girl he met in East Baltimore's Patterson Park in 2001. In some of the photos, he was engaged in sex with her, court records show.

Delgaudio (who once said former President Bill Clinton was "a lawbreaker and a terrible example to our nation's young people") , 50, of Burke, Va., is a frequent talk-radio guest and national figure in conservative politics. He is president of the Legal Affairs Council, a group that helped pay the legal bills of former Reagan administration officials Oliver L. North and Caspar W. Weinberger after they were charged in connection with the Iran-contra affair.

In other words, he's a hypocritical scumbag! Here is a guy who called our last legally elected president a terrible example to our nation's young people for a totally legal and consensual affair and he's a child pornographer? Look, he wasn't charged with possessing it he was charged with producing it!

There was additional evidence that Delgaudio (who once said former President Bill Clinton was "a lawbreaker and a terrible example to our nation's young people") took pornographic images of at least one other little girl but that evidence was not admissible in court because police improperly stopped and searched Delgaudio, a judge ruled.

In a letter to the judge, Delgaudio's attorneys - Bruce Fein and Howard L. Cardin - wrote that he was remorseful and did not know the girls were underage. However, the girls told Delgaudio their ages, according to police.

Delgaudio, who has no prior record, and who once said former President Bill Clinton was "a lawbreaker and a terrible example to our nation's young people" for a consensual and totally legal affair was arrested in November 2001 with a book of obscene photographs he had taken of 15- and 16-year-old girls, according to court documents. The teen-agers went with him on several occasions to a hotel on Pulaski Highway, where they had sex and he paid them to pose in erotic positions for his camera, records show. more

U.S., U.K. Waged War on Iraq Because of Oil, Blair Adviser Says

The U.S. and U.K. went to war against Iraq because of the Middle East country's oil reserves, an adviser to British Prime Minister Tony Blair said.

Sir Jonathan Porritt, head of the Sustainable Development Commission, which advises Blair's government on ecological issues, said the prospect of winning access to Iraqi oil was ''a very large factor'' in the allies' decision to attack Iraq in March.

"I don't think the war would have happened if Iraq didn't have the second-largest oil reserves in the world,'' Porritt said in a Sky News television interview. more

Gay-tolerant societies prosper economically

If you object to homosexuality on moral grounds, as Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., recently did in an interview, you may not be swayed by economic arguments. But if you are a fan of entrepreneurship and business growth, you should know the economic price of intolerance.

The key to understanding America's technological and economic vibrancy lies in our openness to new people and ideas. (liberalism!) Tolerance of immigrants, gays and other minorities is much more important to sustained economic growth and the high-paying jobs than the tax cut President Bush (news - web sites) has in mind.

Research I conducted with Gary Gates, an Urban Institute demographer, shows that the big new-ideas and cutting-edge industries that lead to sustained prosperity are more likely to exist where gay people feel welcome. Most centers of tech-based business growth also have the highest concentrations of gay couples. Conversely, major areas with relatively few gay couples tend to be slow- or no-growth places. Pittsburgh and Buffalo, which have low percentages of gay couples, were two of only three major regions to lose population from 1990 to 2000.

Studies controlling for a wide range of factors also show innovation and economic vitality closely associated with the presence of gays and other indicators of tolerance and diversity, such as the percentage of immigrants and the level of racial and ethnic integration.

Why? Creative, innovative and entrepreneurial activities tend to flourish in the same kinds of places that attract gays and others outside the norm. To put it bluntly, a place where it's OK for men to walk down the street holding hands will probably also be a place where Indian engineers, tattooed software geeks and foreign-born entrepreneurs feel at home. When people from varied backgrounds, places and attitudes can collide, economic home runs are likely. more

Florida Weighs Fate of 2000 Election Ballots

Florida's hanging, dimpled and pregnant chads wreaked havoc in the 2000 presidential election. Now, the 6 million ballots are causing another problem: Should they be destroyed or saved because of their historical significance? We'll give you one guess which choice Bush would make! more

The Secrets of September 11

The White House is battling to keep a report on the terror attacks secret. Does the 2004 election have anything to do with it?

My large and growing conservative reader base will, without a doubt, scream "liberal media! Liberal media!." But Newsweek and MSNBC has your boy Bush cold busted. Even as White House political aides plot a 2004 campaign plan designed to capitalize on the emotions and issues raised by the September 11 terror attacks, administration officials are waging a behind-the-scenes battle to restrict public disclosure of key events relating to the attacks.

AT THE CENTER of the dispute is a more-than-800-page secret report prepared by a joint congressional inquiry detailing the intelligence and law-enforcement failures that preceded the attacks—including provocative, if unheeded warnings, given President Bush and his top advisers during the summer of 2001.

The report was completed last December; only a bare-bones list of “findings” with virtually no details was made public. But nearly six months later, a “working group” of Bush administration intelligence officials assigned to review the document has taken a hard line against further public disclosure. By refusing to declassify many of its most significant conclusions, the administration has essentially thwarted congressional plans to release the report by the end of this month, congressional and administration sources tell NEWSWEEK. In some cases, these sources say, the administration has even sought to “reclassify” some material that was already discussed in public testimony—a move one Senate staffer described as “ludicrous.” The administration’s stand has infuriated the two members of Congress who oversaw the report—Democratic Sen. Bob Graham and Republican Rep. Porter Goss. The two are now preparing a letter of complaint to Vice President Dick Cheney.

Graham is “increasingly frustrated” by the administration’s “unwillingness to release what he regards as important information the public should have about 9-11,” a spokesman said. In Graham’s view, the Bush administration isn’t protecting legitimate issues of national security but information that could be a political “embarrassment,” the aide said. Graham, who last year served as Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, recently told NEWSWEEK: “There has been a cover-up of this.”

Graham’s stand may not be terribly surprising, given that the Florida Democrat is running for president and is seeking to use the issue himself politically. But he has found a strong ally in House Intelligence Committee Chairman Goss, a staunch Republican (and former CIA officer) who in the past has consistently defended the administration’s handling of 9-11 issues and is considered especially close to Cheney.

“I find this process horrendously frustrating,” Goss said in an interview. He was particularly piqued that the administration was refusing to declassify material that top intelligence officials had already testified about. “Senior intelligence officials said things in public hearings that they [administration officials] don’t want us to put in the report,” said Goss. “That’s not something I can rationally accept without further public explanation.”

The tensions over the release of 9-11 related material seems especially relevant—if not ironic—in light of recent reports that the president’s political advisers have devised an unusual re-election strategy that essentially uses the story of September 11 as the liftoff for his campaign. The White House is delaying the Republican nominating convention, scheduled for New York City, until the first week in September 2004—the latest in the party’s history. That would allow Bush’s acceptance speech, now slated for Sept. 2, to meld seamlessly into 9-11 commemoration events due to take place in the city the next week.

Some sources who have read the still-secret congressional report say some sections would not play quite so neatly into White House plans. One portion deals extensively with the stream of U.S. intelligence-agency reports in the summer of 2001 suggesting that Al Qaeda was planning an upcoming attack against the United States—and implicitly raises questions about how Bush and his top aides responded. One such CIA briefing, in July 2001, was particularly chilling and prophetic. It predicted that Osama bin Laden was about to launch a terrorist strike “in the coming weeks,” the congressional investigators found. The intelligence briefing went on to say: “The attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against U.S. facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning.” more

Current Administration Mirrors Fascist Regimes Of The Past

Dr. Lawrence Britt, a political scientist, recently wrote an article about fascism which appeared in Free Inquiry magazine. Dr. Britt studied the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), finding the regimes all had 14 things in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The article is "Fascism Anyone?," Lawrence Britt, Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20.

The 14 characteristics are:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symb ols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda i s neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

Unimaginable Futures

“In Germany they first came for the Communists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me – and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

"-Pastor Martin Niemoller, German Protestant minister, Leader of the church's opposition to Hitler, Nazi concentration camp intern, 1937-45"

In the build up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, comparisons made between Saddam Hussein and Adolf Hitler were effectively exploited as part of the propaganda arsenal promulgated by the spin doctors in Washington to convince the populace of the threat that Saddam presents (presented?) to world peace.

But from the beginnings of the U.S. campaign of “shock and awe”, bombing Iraq into a Stone Age de novo, an ominous vision of unrestrained power was laid bare. It is a vision which lingers even as the leading actors of this tragedy – George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell and company – continue today to play their scripted public role of ‘benevolent’ occupiers. In the wake of the blitzkrieg against Iraq, a more apt comparison to fascism, many would feel, is one that involves the American regime of George W. Bush.

Indeed, in contradistinction to popular propaganda, a frightening image of fascism is evoked by what is already the most powerful state in human history…

Irrespective of comparisons made, of course, it is becoming increasingly clear that the part of protagonist to be played by common citizens in rejecting and resisting these forces and their foreboding empire – beyond simply protesting in the streets – is crucial to our very survival. more

Are We Numb or Dumb? It is frightening in the extreme when lying matters not at all to a free people.

Forget truth. That is the message from our government and its apologists in the media who insist that the Iraq invasion is a great success story even though it was based on a lie.

In the statement broadcast to the Iraqi people after the invasion was launched, President Bush stated: "The goals of our coalition are clear and limited. We will end a brutal regime, whose aggression and weapons of mass destruction make it a unique threat to the world." To which Tony Blair added: "We did not want this war. But in refusing to give up his weapons of mass destruction, Saddam gave us no choice but to act."

That claim of urgency — requiring us to short-circuit the U.N. weapons inspectors — has proved to be a whopper of a falsehood. Late Sunday, the U.S. Army conceded that what had been reported as its only significant WMD find — two mobile chemical labs and a dozen 55-gallon drums of chemicals — "showed no positive hits at all" for chemical weapons.

But we now live easily with lies. "As far as I'm concerned, we do not need to find any weapons of mass destruction to justify this war," writes Thomas L. Friedman in the New York Times. The pro-administration rationalization holds that the noble end of toppling one of the world's nastier dictators — assuming that the Iraqi people end up freer and not ensnared in an Iranian-type theocracy — justifies the ignoble means of lying to the world. Or, as Friedman puts it, "Mr. Bush doesn't owe the world any explanation for missing chemical weapons (even if it turns out that the White House hyped this issue.)"

Hyping? Is that how we are now to rationalize the ever more obvious truth that the American people and their elected representatives in Congress were deliberately deceived by the president as to the imminent threat that Iraq posed to our security? Is this popular acceptance of such massive deceit exemplary of the representative democracy we are so aggressively exporting, nay imposing, on the world? _blank">more

US Marine investigated for war crimes

A US Marine sergeant is under investigation for possible war crimes committed in Iraq based on statements he made to his hometown newspaper, military officials said.
Gunnery Sergeant Gus Covarrubias became the target of the preliminary inquiry after he described for the Las Vegas, Nevada, Review-Journal daily how he had hunted down and shot two Iraqi soldiers after a firefight.

"A preliminary inquiry has been initiated by the Naval Criminal Investigative Service to examine the circumstances surrounding the statements made by Gunnery Sergeant Covarrubias," the statement said. "The preliminary inquiry will determine if the actions described by Gunnery Sergeant Covarrubias during combat operations met the established rules of engagement and complied with the law of war." more

out...

Sordid Tales Of Bush Twin In The Buff!

The search is on for a videotape rumored to show First Daughter Barbara Bush in the nude

Hustler magazine honcho Larry Flynt is hunting for a videotape rumored to show First Daughter Barbara Bush in the nude.

Flynt's people are scouring the New Haven, Conn., campus of Yale University, where Barbara, 21, is a student, in hopes of buying a video supposedly made at one of Yale's notorious "naked parties."

"We definitely have heard the story and we definitely have a rep over there but so far we have not been able to substantiate anything - yet," Flynt told PAGE SIX yesterday. "But usually where there's smoke, there's fire, so we're still looking."

A source says Barbara has attended plenty of the bare-all bacchanals, a Yale tradition in which overworked Ivy Leaguers relieve stress by doffing their duds and drinking some suds.

The footage in question was allegedly taken at a naked party several months ago, and Flynt's foot soldiers have been in talks with a student who says he is friends with the guy who has the tape.

Flynt has offered the person $1 million. more and more

Of course, the only reason I'm drawing attention to this story is to further piss off the conservatives who read this blog daily. My personal feeling is more power to Barbara Bush! I think an intrusion into anyone's personal life is wrong unless a crime is being or has been committed. Nudity at a private party isn't illegal yet but of course with republicans in power that could all change.

With the Bush twins partying like this, they're NOT partying republican style - which means they're not drilling for oil in the Alaskan wilderness, not blowing the surplus, not threatening to cut veteran's benefits, not cutting rich people's taxes, and not invading third world countries.

Payback is a bitch (Remember the millions spent on Clinton's penis?) and it's too bad someone like Barbara Bush, who I would have partied with myself, has to be a pawn in her moron daddy's political wars. She'll get over it. Hell, she probably doesn't even care. However, the public will perceive this as more light shined on republican hypocrisy.

More On Larry Flynt - How The Owner Of A Girlie Magazine Stopped The Republican Smear Machine

High noon had come for the President's enemies as the Senate trial got underway--the culmination of years of vicious allegations, wild conspiracy theories, and wholly partisan investigations, all of which had gone nowhere. Now reduced to criminalizing the President's personal life by alleging that he had lied about sex, the Clinton-haters were finally at center stage. The time had come for them to put up or shut up.

However, their earlier high confidence for the President's removal from office had dissipated considerably after the circumstances of Bob Livingston's resignation on December 19--and was further diminished by Flynt's continuing crusade to expose hypocrisy in the wake of his revelations about Bob Barr on January 11. In fact, other than the unmasking of Kenneth Starr as a partisan sexual witchhunter after the release of The Starr Report in September 1998 and the excellent legal work performed by the President's attorneys before and during the Senate trial, there was no single factor which had a greater impact on the impeachment process than Larry Flynt.

Had Flynt never emerged in this drama, Bob Livingston would have become Speaker of the House and the impeachment of the President would have shifted from the House to the Senate with a tremendous, even an overwhelming momentum. Instead, with Livingston's stunning resignation and the hypocrisy of the President's enemies clear and present to the American public, who kept the President's approval ratings high, the case limped to trial. . . .

Even though many of our supporters were disappointed that we didn't reveal all of the information we had collected, Flynt's finest hour in this project, other than his handling of the Livingston matter, came when he finally said, "That's it. No more."

In the end, we no longer had the stomach to go for the throat--unless the President was suddenly convicted and removed from office. . . .

... On November 23--as the OIC leaks investigation proceeded and the President's impeachment appeared inevitable over what many considered the criminalization of his personal life--a representative of Larry Flynt approached me with an offer to investigate hypocrisy among the President's critics: those who had one standard of behavior for the President and another standard for themselves. Earlier, on October 4, Flynt had placed a full-page ad in the Washington Post, offering "up to a million dollars" to those who could provide proof of such hypocrisy... more

U.S. Troops Fire on Iraq Protesters - Again!

U.S. troops opened fire on anti-American demonstrators for the second time this week as Iraqis marched Wednesday to protest the previous shooting. The city's mayor said two people were killed and 14 wounded in the clash.

I thought we were bringing democracy to Iraq? more

Spend-Happy Republicans Push U.S. To Brink Of Default

The Treasury Department says the United States could face the prospect of not being able to pay its bills in late May unless Congress raises the government's borrowing authority, now capped at $6.4 trillion.

Treasury's debt managers have taken a number of steps since February to prevent the government from defaulting on the national debt, but "on current projections, the extraordinary measures taken since Feb. 20, 2003, will only be adequate to meet the government's needs until the latter half of May," said a statement released Tuesday.

After that - absent a boost in the government's borrowing authority by Congress - Treasury would breach the current $6.4 trillion ceiling on the national debt.

"The Treasury will continue to work with Congress to ensure the government's ability to finance its operations," Treasury said.

Treasury has asked Congress to boost the government's borrowing authority, although it has not suggested a specific amount. A proposal is pending on Capitol Hill that would raise the debt ceiling to $7.38 trillion.

Last year, Congress boosted the old debt limit by $450 billion, from $5.95 trillion to the current $6.4 trillion.

At that time Treasury warned that Congress would need to again increase the government's borrowing authority.

Boosting the debt limit is more a matter of politics than economics.

Economists doubt the Republican-controlled Congress will refuse to raise the limit. A federal default is considered unimaginable because it would rattle bond markets, force interest rates higher, weaken the world economy and deliver a political blow to President Bush.

Democrats point to the government's need to borrow more to ridicule President Bush's tax cuts, his handling of the economy and ballooning federal government budget deficits, which are expected to hit records this year and next.

By Memorial Day, Republicans hope to have pushed through Congress a tax-cut bill with a price tag of between $350 billion and $550 billion through 2013.

If Congress must approve a debt-limit extension during the same period of time, it could play into Democrats' political argument that the new tax cut will only make the government's red ink worse. more



Green Party Officials May Throw Support Behind Democrats; Cite "National Emergency" Of Bush's Hard Right Agenda; Nader Urged To Seek Senate Office

The surprisingly bellicose and hard-right direction of the Bush administration has given many Greens pause about running a third-party presidential campaign next year. One prominent Green Party activist -- journalist and former Nader confidant Ronnie Dugger -- has publicly and privately pleaded with his old friend not to run for president, urging him instead to run for senator or governor. Dugger argues that the extremism of the Bush presidency has created a "national emergency" that requires a unified effort on the left to beat the Republican ticket in 2004. more

Deciphering the Democrats' Debacle: Why the Republican majority (probably) won't last.

This is a very good and important read...

... despite the Republican tsunami described by many media outlets, the actual electoral shift was quite mild. Though politically the election was a landmark, the underlying numbers suggest a continuing partisan balance. Democrats lost two seats in the Senate, six in the House, and gained three governorships. As nonpartisan analyst Charlie Cook has pointed out, "A swing of 94,000 votes out of 75,723,756 cast nationally would have resulted in the Democrats capturing control of the House and retaining a majority in the Senate on Nov. 5. If that had occurred, obituaries would have been written--inevitably and prematurely--about the presidency of George W. Bush. Instead, we are entertained by predictions that the Democratic Party, as we know it, may cease to exist."

Given the very evenness of partisan division in this country, even minor fluctuations in public sentiment can cause sudden lurches in political power. Indeed, the last election differed markedly from 1994, when huge Republican gains (52 House and nine Senate seats, 10 governorships) really did change the partisan balance dramatically.

Nevertheless, the shock of '02 initially devastated Democratic morale. Many in the party seemed helpless before the Republican success, ready to concede the 2004 election. For their part, Republicans were riding high, canonizing Karl Rove, and mentally fitting Bush for a spot on Mount Rushmore. Conservatives like Fred Barnes even spoke fondly of an "emerging 9/11 majority."

But that's begun to change. Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu's December runoff victory in Louisiana put Republican triumphalism in perspective. Subsequent events have revived Democratic hopes, as Bush's approval ratings, especially on the economy, have fallen and his diplomatic failures leading up to the Iraq war have been exposed. That's not the only encouraging news. A careful reading of the election and its aftermath suggests the GOP position has serious underlying weaknesses. In fact, the Republican victory depended on a series of unsustainable advantages that a tough, smart Democratic effort should be able to counter, forcing a competitive 2004 election and the likely--though not certain--ascendancy that Judis and I predicted by the end of the decade.

The GOP's midterm wins depended heavily on their advantages in five areas that are either unlikely to persist or were overrated to begin with: a reliance on white voters, the growth of exurban voters, heavy GOP turnout, the tax-cut issue, and war. I'll tackle these in order.

Last November was all about the white vote. For all the talk of Republican minority outreach, the voters who showed up for the GOP on election day were, with few exceptions, white. In the 2000 election, 54 percent of whites voted for Bush and 56 percent for congressional Republicans; in 2002 that figure rose to 58 percent, which, coupled with higher turnout of whites, especially conservative whites, was enough for victory. Viewed one way, that's good news for Republicans, since whites comprise the overwhelming majority of U.S. voters. Trouble is, that majority is steadily diminishing. What's more, Republicans' core constituencies among white voters--those in rural areas, married men, married homemakers, and so forth--are also shrinking relative to other voter groups, which makes the demographic challenge of maintaining a majority even tougher.

As Matthew Dowd, polling director at the Republican National Committee, has pointed out, if minorities and whites vote in 2004 as they did in the 2000 election, Democrats will win by 3 million votes, for just that reason. In the long term, unless the GOP can make inroads among minority voters, they'll lose. In 2002, they made essentially no inroads at all. Recall that in the 2000 election, Al Gore got 90 percent of the black vote; in 2002, blacks appear to have voted at similar rates--if not slightly higher--for Democratic congressional and gubernatorial candidates. Hispanic support for Democrats was similarly rock solid, despite strenuous GOP outreach efforts. For example, California governor Gray Davis beat his Republican challenger Bill Simon by 65 to 24 percent among Hispanics--figures essentially identical to those by which Davis beat his 1998 challenger, Dan Lundgren. Nationally, a Greenberg-Quinlan-Rosner poll taken after the 2002 election indicated that Hispanics supported Democrats by 62 to 38 percent, figures nearly identical to 1998 numbers. more


out...

#1!

Conservatives are nervous about the publication of Sidney Blumenthal's The Clinton Wars, which will, for the first time, present the the facts from an insider's perspective about the ill-fated right-wing coup attempt in the late 90s.

As you read here yesterday, rightwing shill Matt Drudge has tried to spin the book's writer as someone out for revenge. What Drudge actually did was move the book to #1 yesterday on Amazon's Top Non-fiction list. Drudge once slandered Blumenthal and is now pretrified over what Blumenthal may have written about him. Author David Brock, in his book "Blinded By The Right" dropped a bombshell about Drudge last year - revealing Matt Drudge is gay. Nothing wrong with being gay BUT Drudge has aligned himself with a political party who is openly hostile to homosexuals.

Other figures who may feel the heat from Blumenthal's The Clinton Wars are Ken Starr, Tom DeLay, Newt Gingrich, Henry Hyde, and possibly George W. Bush. Expect the book to reveal the truth behind the many republican-fabricated scandals that plagued the most successful presidency of the second half of the 20th century.

Order it TODAY!

Bush Speaks Out On Dixie Chicks Comment

In an interview with Tom Brokaw, pResident Bush spoke about freedom of speech and the Dixie Chicks:

"The Dixie Chicks are free to speak their mind," said Bush. "They can say what they want to say. They shouldn't have their feelings hurt just because some people don't want to buy their records when they speak out. You know, freedom is a two-way street. But I don't really care what the Dixie Chicks said. I want to do what I think is right for the American people, and if some singers or Hollywood stars feel like speaking out, that's fine. That's the great thing about America. It stands in stark contrast to Iraq, by the way."

Very well put, Mr. Bush, now wouldn't it be nice if you actually meant it? I mean, who can forget things you've said in moments of unguarded candor like "there ought to be limits to freedom, " spoken by you at an Austin Press Conference, May 21, 1999. Or how about this one: "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," which is what you said while meeting with Congressional leaders in 2000.

So pardon us if we don't buy into your faux First Amendment affection. After all, the minions within your party treat the First Amendment as a nuisance. They learned it from so-called leaders like you.



Springsteen backs Dixie Chicks

Bruce Springsteen has given his support to country band the Dixie Chicks, who have faced severe criticism over a comment they made about President George Bush.
The Dixie Chicks received death threats, had their records burned and were removed from radio playlists after singer Natalie Maines said she was embarrassed that Bush was from her home state of Texas.

But Springsteen said the band were merely expressing their "right to free speech" and had received a "raw deal" from critics.

In a message on his official website, the star said: "To me, they're terrific American artists expressing American values by using their American right to free speech.

"For them to be banished wholesale from radio stations, and even entire radio networks, for speaking out is un-American."

Springsteen said there was a "pressure coming from the government and big business to enforce conformity of thought concerning the war".

He said pressure "goes against everything that this country is about - namely freedom".

"Right now, we are supposedly fighting to create freedom in Iraq, at the same time that some are trying to intimidate and punish people for using that same freedom here at home," he said.

"I don't know what happens next, but I do want to add my voice to those who think that the Dixie Chicks are getting a raw deal, and an un-American one to boot. I send them my support." more

Public Enemy to Take on Bush With CD-DVD

Hip-hop pioneers Public Enemy are still fighting the powers that be.

The group, known for anthems including "Don't Believe the Hype" and "Fight The Power," will take on President Bush with their new CD-DVD, "Son of a Bush," scheduled for May 6 release.

The title track, which first appeared on last year's "Revolverlution," criticizes both the current president and his father.

Among the lyrics: "Have you forgotten/I been through the first term of rotten/The father, the son/and the holy Bush... I told y'all when the first Bush was tappin' my phone... Can't truss 'em."

The group joins other artists including the Dixie Chicks, Beastie Boys, Pearl Jam, Sheryl Crow, and Bruce Springsteen who have spoken out against the pResident.

Hillary Clinton Rallies The Democratic Troops
Bush a "snake oil salesman."

In a fiery speech Monday night, U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton accused the Bush administration of having the worst economic policies since Herbert Hoover, with no real plan to end the nation's fiscal troubles.

Clinton, D-N.Y., told about 1,550 Connecticut Democrats that an increasing number of Americans are unhappy with Bush's policies.

"There is an unease," she told the party faithful gathered at the Democrats' annual Jefferson Jackson Bailey dinner in Southington. "People know better than what they hear and what they see."

Clinton accused Bush of squandering the surpluses that accumulated during the administration of her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

"In just two years, the country again faces hefty budget deficits," she said. "We are, unfortunately, reaping the bad consequences of a wrong economic policy. They have the most wrong-headed economic policies that we've seen since Herbert Hoover."

She said many people, including some Republican lawmakers, have told her they worry about what she characterized as a Republican tax-cutting agenda that she compared to a snake oil salesman.

Clinton claimed Bush's tax-cut plan favors the wealthy while sacrificing the programs that Americans care about, such as public education, prescription drug coverage, child care and a clean environment.

She received a standing ovation when she angrily said it was unfair for critics of Bush's policies to be accused of being unpatriotic.

"We are Americans," she said. "We have the right to participate and debate any administration." more

Iraq Invasion Partly For Israel's Benefit ... And The Evidence Keeps Piling Up Despite Those Who Would Suppress It

Calling Them Like I See Them: In an informal debate this past weekend, I was accused of being anti-Israel and a "kook" for daring to suggest an invasion of Syria would benefit Israel and that an Israel-friendly government is in the works for Iraq. I quoted source after source to back my position, but like all rightwingers and rightwing wannabes, I was met with insults and personal attacks by my opponents. Typical of discussions with these kind of people, their only defense was the bare assertion fallacy, a fallacy of reasoning in which the user gives no reasons at all for his position other than the fact that he says so, facts be damned.

You can read the point in which I entered the discussion here. I'm "wyldwolf" in the thread and as is my style in a discussion, I was calm and informed, backing my assertions with multiple sources. The thread was eventually locked by the moderator and he called me a jerk because I was completely dominating his wife, Shaindle, in the discussion. She probably whined to him all night, "please shut the liberal up... please he's making me look like a monkey!!."

The evidence keeps piling up...

Israeli Calls for 'Regime Change' in Iran, Syria

The Israeli ambassador in Washington called for "regime change" in Iran and Syria on Monday through diplomatic isolation, economic sanctions and what he called "psychological pressure."

Ambassador Daniel Ayalon said the U.S. invasion of Iraq and overthrow of Iraqi President Saddam Hussein helped create great opportunities for Israel but it was "not enough."

"It has to follow through. We still have great threats of that magnitude coming from Syria, coming from Iran," he told a conference of the pro-Israeli Anti-Defamation League.

Ayalon said he did not advocate or foresee the invasion of Syria and Iran. "I certainly do not see any aggressive military campaign. I don't think that would be the right thing. Nobody is suggesting that," he said.

But he added: "There are other means that can be exhausted ... The way to deal with Iran for instance is to delegitimize its regime and the way to do that is applying political pressure ... and to really apply economic sanctions." more

out...

Intelligence agencies accuse Bush and Blair of distorting and fabricating evidence in rush to war... American officials have all but conceded that the weapons of mass destruction campaign was simply a means to an end – a "global show of American power" ... Bush has lied to the American people and his actions have caused DEATHS... but since the lies weren't about a blowjob, it must be ok!

Revealed: How the road to war was paved with lies

Only that damn liberal media would print such garbage... wait! This comes from a foreign source! They must... hate Bush! Yeah! That HAS to be it!

The case for invading Iraq to remove its weapons of mass destruction was based on selective use of intelligence, exaggeration, use of sources known to be discredited and outright fabrication, The Independent on Sunday can reveal.

A high-level UK source said last night that intelligence agencies on both sides of the Atlantic were furious that briefings they gave political leaders were distorted in the rush to war with Iraq. "They ignored intelligence assessments which said Iraq was not a threat," the source said. Quoting an editorial in a Middle East newspaper which said, "Washington has to prove its case. If it does not, the world will for ever believe that it paved the road to war with lies", he added: "You can draw your own conclusions."

On nuclear weapons, the British Government claimed that the former regime sought uranium feed material from the government of Niger in west Africa. This was based on letters later described by the International Atomic Energy Agency as crude forgeries.

On chemical weapons, a CIA report on the likelihood that Saddam would use weapons of mass destruction was partially declassified. The parts released were those which made it appear that the danger was high; only after pressure from Senator Bob Graham, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee and Democratic candidate for President, was the whole report declassified, including the conclusion that the chances of Iraq using chemical weapons were "very low" for the "foreseeable future".

On biological weapons, the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, told the UN Security Council in February that the former regime had up to 18 mobile laboratories. He attributed the information to "defectors" from Iraq, without saying that their claims – including one of a "secret biological laboratory beneath the Saddam Hussein hospital in central Baghdad" – had repeatedly been disproved by UN weapons inspectors.

On missiles, Iraq accepted UN demands to destroy its al-Samoud weapons, despite disputing claims that they exceeded the permitted range. No banned Scud missiles were found before or since, but last week the Secretary of State for Defence, Geoff Hoon, suggested Scuds had been fired during the war. There is no proof any were in fact Scuds. more ( very good read!)

Unemployment Rate Darkens To 10.4 Percent

The jobless trap: Some settle for little, or give up

The number of so-called "underemployed" — those forced to take part-time or low-paying jobs — has grown 41 percent nationwide since the recession started two years ago.

Throw in the discouraged jobless who have stopped looking for work altogether, and the 5.8 percent U.S. unemployment rate darkens to a seasonally unadjusted 10.4 percent.

The gap explains why jobless rates are holding steady or even dropping while the economy continues to lose jobs. more


Americans have good reason to be afraid of their leaders
Americans are waking up to a world where, if you're not for your Government, you're a traitor

Freed from the oppression of their dictator, Iraqis are now free to complain. From tens of thousands of marchers chanting "down, down USA - don't stay, go away" to individuals spitting at soldiers, Iraqis are flexing a muscle that, paradoxically, had atrophied under Saddam Hussein.

But now here's an irony that no one expected. Back in America, complaining about America is the one thing that's pretty much disappeared, lost under the weight of a collective patriotism and increasing constitutional limitations.

Voicing any sort of anti-war opinion is just not done any more and a number of organisations have sprung up with the express purpose of blacklisting celebrities who speak out.

Susan Sarandon is obviously on the list. She's quoted as saying she doesn't remember ever being in a climate where people were too afraid to even have a conversation about an issue, let alone a debate.

But then in America, uttering any threatening remark about the President is illegal and likely to land you in jail. Writer Jonathan Freedland, looking at America's history of tolerance and diversity, said in the Guardian that the country was turning into a very un-American America, "where the limits of acceptable discussion have narrowed sharply and anyone commenting negatively on the war or the President is denounced as unpatriotic".

It shouldn't come as a surprise. A quick reading of the 2001 Patriot Act, formed in the dark hours after 9/11, clearly shows it's all part of a bigger plan. Under the guise of security, the act allowed all kinds of incursions into private life.

Some - like the right to track organisations suspected of funding terrorists - made sense in light of the attacks. Others - like the right to seize library lending records or the recruitment of posties, pizza delivery guys, and local shopkeepers into a national network of informers - did seem draconian.

But it turns out it was not enough. Sweeping new amendments to the bill have been drawn up. The Patriot Act II or as the brave would have it, the Liberty for Security Act, was leaked to the press in February and in its present form makes for scary reading. It allows things like random arrests, secret military tribunals for presidentially designated terrorists, and concealment of presidential records.

It even proposes reversing a federal court decision authorising the release of the names of the hundreds of people still detained, without representation, in the dragnet following the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Perhaps you believe that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear? The Lawyers Committee for Human Rights, in New York, warns that for the first time in United States history, the act will explicitly authorise secret arrests, not to mention sneak-and-peek searches.

That cute term means federal agents can enter your home, download your computer and internet viewing history, take your private business records and any other material, including confidential library and bookstore records - without telling you, without proof of probable cause, or without getting a court order.

And the best part? The legislation does not restrict searches to people suspected of being involved in terrorism.

It gets worse. The act not only increases Government power while decreasing checks on its invasive power. If passed (and that looks likely), the Government will be able to sample and catalogue genetic information, without a court order or your consent. The act also broadens the term "terrorist" to include anyone with views that differ from the Government.

And forget being a whistle-blower. That's set to become illegal, even if your motive is to protect the public from corporate wrongdoing or Government neglect.

But then to whistle-blow you need access to information. Under Patriot Act II information such as the environmental safety of local factories will be off-limits. And you won't be able to contribute to meaningful dialogue on the future of such resources as forests (that constitutes belonging to a "special interest group").

In addition if you don't like a secret decision made by a Government organisation - say, clear-felling ancient sequoia trees - you'll have no right to appeal. And even the press will be barred from publishing contentious information.

Feeling a tingle up your spine yet? Richard Woods, the head of our own spy service, the SIS, wouldn't comment. Even his receptionist Mary "I don't give my second name" would not comment on questions about New Zealand's response to the Patriot Act II.

But in comparison to the US draft, the proposed amendments to our own 2002 Terrorism Suppression Act are puny procedures - like we require a court warrant to use electronic tracking devices.

... Now... Americans are waking up to a world where, if you're not for your Government, you're a traitor... more

Graham: Bush Has Abandoned War on Terror

Democratic presidential candidate Bob Graham said Sunday that President Bush has virtually abandoned Afghanistan and the fight against terrorism, which allowed al-Qaida to regroup while he pursued war in Iraq. The Florida senator also said that by refusing to allow an Iranian-style religious government to take power in Baghdad, even if elected by the Iraqis, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld "demonstrates the kind of quagmire that we are potentially going to be in in Iraq."

"If you talk about a democracy, which means that people vote and select the political leadership that they desire, then you can't say, `But there are certain segments of the population that are off-limits,'" he told ABC's "This Week." more

Knowing our enemy: The Difference Between George W. Bush and North Korea's Kim Jong Il

As mindless liberals reflexively attack our elected wartime President, George W. Bush over his brilliant and inspired handling of the near-crisis brought about by the sinister North Korean communist regime, it is important that we true conservatives remember the nature of the Korean dictator and charter member of the Axis of Evil.

He is the pampered and spoiled product of his country's ruling elite and the son of his country's former leader. Born to the wealth and high social standing of his family's political dynasty, he has enjoyed a life of privilege far removed from concerns of his exploited countrymen. Despite an obvious lack of merit, talent or aptitude, he received the best accommodations his country could offer. He was a notorious playboy and immoral rake until he reached an age at which most men have matured. He produced nothing and accomplished nothing unconnected to his family's name, and owes his current political position to solely his father's cronies.

Surrounded by sycophants and toadies, he adheres to a discredited ideology that most of his countrymen would reject if they were not routinely and massively propagandized. He is unconcerned with the economic devastation his party's ideology has visited on his country, except as to avoid complete disaster and cynically manipulate each crisis to the passing advantage of his party and the ruling elite.

Paranoid and contemptuous of foreign opinion, he has alienated almost the entire world with disjointed, bellicose, but often colorful rhetoric that most other nations find frightening. His erratic foreign policy consists solely of slogans intended to further propagandize a fearful domestic audience rather than assure his neighbors. Often, he unpredictibly reverses his own national policy and acts unilaterally to further a political ideology that is incompatible with democracy.

These are the differences between Kim Jong Il and our own beloved and respected leader. Liberals are blind to those differences. (snicker... snicker...)

Isn't It Ironic? In An Attempt To Smear The New Pro-Bill Clinton Book "The Clinton Wars," Rightwing Shill Matt Drudge Causes The Book's Sales To Skyrocket!

It isn't a big secret that rightwing shill "journalist" Matt Drudge doesn't like writer Sidney Blumenthal, author of the new book "The Clinton Wars." Drudge was at one time sued by Blumenthal for libel. And now, on the eve of the book's release, Drudge is taking another shot at Blumenthal. Unfortunately for Drudge (and republicans across the country) the attention he has given Blumenthal's book has caused preorders for it to skyrocket on Amazon.com.

"The Clinton Wars" documents as never before the unprecedented concerted assault on the highly successful Clinton presidency by the right-wing that created a constitutional crisis by invading the President’s personal life. Its shocking revelations of those who tried to overthrow a progressive, popular President goes to the heart of the conflict that continues beyond the Clinton years.

When Drudge wrote his piece on the book yesterday, he gleefully pointed out the book only ranked #23,588 on Amazon's sales chart. This morning, it stands at #79.

Buy it!

out...

suggesting for the first time that coalition troops may come up empty in their search,

Bush Admits: Iraq's WMD May Have Been Destroyed

pResident Bush raised the possibility Thursday that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction were destroyed before U.S.-led war, suggesting for the first time that coalition troops may come up empty in their search. Bush, who is expected to mark the end of hostilities soon, defied much of the world to wage war against Saddam Hussein in a bid to rid Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. Iraqi leaders asserted the nation had none, and an intensive search by coalition forces has uncovered no proof so far of chemical or biological weapons or a nuclear weapons program.

So there. more

Whose Foreign Policy Opinion Does Tony Blair Trust Most, Bill Clinton's or George Bush's? Bill Clinton's, Of Course!

According to the Guardian, Tony Blair took repeated secret advice from our last legally elected president Bill Clinton on how to unlock the diplomatic impasse between Europe and the US in the build-up to the war on Iraq. In the crucial weekend before to the final breakdown of diplomacy in March, Mr Clinton was a guest of Mr Blair's at Chequers where the pair discussed the crisis.

Three days after his Chequers meeting, Mr Clinton made a rare public appeal to his successor, George Bush, to give the UN weapons inspectors more time.

Mr Blair and Mr Clinton met at least three times to discuss the war, underlining the extent to which Mr Blair rates Mr Clinton's analytical powers.

In a speech in Washington three days later Mr Clinton said the UN's chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, should set the timetable for compliance, adding: "I hope the United States would agree to that amount of time, whatever it is." At that point, Mr Blair was pressing Bush in private to extend the weapons inspections deadline.

Mr. Blair knows a qualified elected president when he sees one. To bad he has to work with Bush now!

American Media Coverage of Iraq War Blasted On Both Sides Of The Atlantic!

Turner Calls Rival Media Mogul and Fox News Owner Murdoch 'Warmonger'

Ted Turner said on Thursday too few people owned too many media organizations and called rival media baron Rupert Murdoch a warmonger for what he said was Murdoch's promotion of the U.S. war in Iraq.

"He's a warmonger," Turner said in an evening speech to the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco of Murdoch, whose News Corp. Ltd. owns the fast-growing Fox News Channel. "He promoted it."

Asked by an audience member for his thoughts on Fox's larger ratings share than CNN's, Turner said, "Just because your ratings are bigger doesn't mean you're better." more

BBC Chief Attacks U.S. Media War Coverage

U.S. broadcasters' coverage of the Iraq war was so unquestioningly patriotic and so lacking in impartiality that it threatened the credibility of America's electronic media, the head of the BBC said on Thursday.

BBC Director General Greg Dyke singled out for criticism the fast growing News Corp. Ltd.'s Fox News Channel, owned by media baron Rupert Murdoch, and Clear Channel Communications Inc., the largest operator of radio stations in the United States, with over 1,200 stations, for special criticism.

"Personally, I was shocked while in the United States by how unquestioning the broadcast news media was during this war," Dyke said in a speech at a University of London conference.

"If Iraq proved anything, it was that the BBC cannot afford to mix patriotism and journalism. This is happening in the United States and if it continues, will undermine the credibility of the U.S. electronic news media."

Dyke singled out Fox News, the most popular U.S. cable news network during the conflict, for its "gung-ho patriotism," saying: "We are still surprised when we see Fox News with such a committed political position." more
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dixie Chicks: Naked Defiance

They have been called Saddam's Angels and the Dixie Sluts, traitors and big mouths. Radio stations stopped playing their new CD and invited listeners to dump their old albums in garbage cans and there have been death threats and calls to boycott their upcoming US tour. Trash has been dumped in their yards and they now have 24 hour security. All because they dared to speak out against George W. Bush.

But a funny thing happened to the Dixie Chicks as they were being victimized by rightwing America's new McCarthyism. They got more popular!

"To be brutally honest, there has been no effect, other than the odd phone call to a building inquiring about a refund. There's a lot more noise than action," says Rob Light, the act's agent and head of the music division at Creative Artists Agency speaking to Billboard Magazine.

"Actually, the buildings are getting more asking, if there are refunds, can they buy the tickets."

He says that of 59 shows, only six have seats left, and those are all 85%-90% sold out and expected to go clean.

Interestingly, as wire services picked up this Billboard story, they inserted an extra line which read, The Dixie Chicks' album "Home" has tumbled down the charts in the weeks following singer Natalie Maines' declaration in London that she was ashamed to come from the same state (Texas) as Bush. (see Rueters) This line was NOT in the original. Why? Because it isn't true and Billboard would know because they are the ones who track and rank record chart positions!

After 34 weeks on the Billboard Country Albums chart, The Dixie Chick's latest album is #3 and was #1 just last week! (source). Considering the controversy happened several weeks ago, the album's chart position hardly qualifies as a "chart tumbler," huh? Home has sold over 6 million copies in 34 weeks - completeing eclipsing the performance of Toby Keith, an outspoken Dixie Chicks critic who is using a backdrop of Dixie Chick Maines and Saddam Hussein during concerts. His latest album has been on Billboard's country chart over a month longer than the Dixie Chick's but has managed to only sell 2 million copies.

Now, the Dixie Chicks are fighting back in the latest issue of Entertainment Weekly, where they have posed nude on the cover - concealed only with epithets they have attracted and vowing to continue to speak their minds.. And there are signs of a backlash against the backlash with sales of their CD, Home, bouncing back up in the charts this week.

"People think this'll scare us and shut us up and it's gonna do the opposite," said Maines. "They just served themselves a huge headache." more



out...